Borgess Medical Center v. Smith, Docket No. 84010
Decision Date | 20 May 1986 |
Docket Number | Docket No. 84010 |
Citation | 386 N.W.2d 684,149 Mich.App. 796 |
Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
Parties | BORGESS MEDICAL CENTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Delores SMITH, Defendant-Appellee. |
Early, Lennon, Peters & Crocker by Robert A. Davidoff, Kalamazoo, for plaintiff-appellant.
Before ALLEN, P.J. and R.B. BURNS and KAUFMAN, * JJ.
On September 4, 1984, a Hillsdale District Court judge rendered an opinion and judgment holding that under the married women's property act, M.C.L. Sec. 557.21; M.S.A. Sec. 26.165(1), a woman was not responsible for the debts of her husband. Plaintiff appealed this decision to the Hillsdale County Circuit Court.
When upholding the district court's determination, the circuit court judge stated in part:
Plaintiff now appeals by leave granted from the January 14, 1985, order which upheld the judgment of the district court and denied the plaintiff the relief it requested. Defendant's husband had obtained medical treatment from plaintiff, Borgess Medical Center, immediately prior to his death. Defendant's husband, Tommy Smith, the decedent, had contracted to pay for the services rendered. Defendant, however, did not personally agree to guarantee payment.
Mr. Smith died on May 13, 1983, leaving no estate or other assets. Plaintiff thereupon brought suit in district court against defendant for $3,835.30 in accrued medical expenses, asserting that defendant was legally obligated to pay for necessary services provided to her late husband.
Defendant then moved for summary judgment, noting that existing common law does not make a wife liable for her husband's necessary expenses, and she further asserted that the married women's property act, M.C.L. Sec. 557.21; M.S.A. Sec. 26.165(1), preserved her separate estate free from liability "for the debts, obligations or engagements of any other person, including the woman's husband". Plaintiff argued that, if the act applied, it was unconstitutional as violative of the equal protection clauses of the Michigan and Federal Constitutions. The district court dismissed plaintiff's claim and was affirmed at the circuit court level.
Both lower courts determined that they were powerless to treat these issues on the merits, absent controlling Michigan appellate authority.
The only question involved is: Where the estate of a husband is inadequate to compensate a third party for necessary services furnished to the husband, may the wife, in the absence of a contract, be held liable for payment for such services?
M.C.L. Sec. 557.21; M.S.A. Sec. 26.165(1) provides:
(Emphasis added.)
This section by its plain language states that a wife is not responsible for the debts of her husband. We disagree with plaintiff's assertion that the statute "does not establish that a married woman is not responsible for the necessary expenses of her husband".
The cases from other jurisdictions upon which plaintiff relies do not stand for that proposition. In In the Matter of the Estate of Stromsted, 99 Wis.2d 136, 299 N.W.2d 226 (1980), the Wisconsin Supreme Court did not address whether a wife was responsible for her husband's medical expenses. Rather, the court held that the wife or her estate could be sued on a theory of quasi-contract for her own medical expenses. However, the court held that the husband was still primarily liable. Moreover, the court did not construe language similar to that in the statute under consideration here.
In Jersey Shore Medical Center-Fitkin Hospital v. Estate of Baum, 84 N.J. 137, 417 A.2d 1003 (1980), the New Jersey Supreme Court found that the New Jersey Married Woman's Act, N.J.S.A. 37:2-15, if read literally, would bar liability for either spouse for the medical debts of the other.
While there is no Michigan case addressing this issue, several cases...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Landmark Medical Center v. Gauthier
...618 N.E.2d 1 (Ind.1993); St. Francis Regional Medical Center v. Bowles, 251 Kan. 334, 836 P.2d 1123 (1992); Borgess Medical Center v. Smith, 149 Mich.App. 796, 386 N.W.2d 684 (1986); Hulse v. Warren, 777 S.W.2d 319 (Mo.Ct.App.1989); Jersey Shore Medical Center-Fitkin v. Estate of Baum, 84 N......
-
Medical Business Associates, Inc. v. Steiner
...South Carolina (see, Richland Memorial Hosp. v. Burton, 282 S.C. 159, 318 S.E.2d 12), Michigan (see, Borgess Medical Center v. Smith, 149 Mich.App. 796, 386 N.W.2d 684, but see, Bronson Methodist Hosp. v. LaRoy, 171 Mich.App. 729, 430 N.W.2d 817), Wisconsin (see, Marshfield Clinic v. Dische......
-
North Ottawa Community Hosp. v. Kieft
...necessaries rendered to the spouse, if they were rendered during the marriage." An accompanying brief cited Borgess Medical Center v. Smith, 149 Mich.App. 796, 386 N.W.2d 684 (1986), and Bronson Methodist Hosp. v. LaRoy, 171 Mich.App. 729, 430 N.W.2d 817 (1988), as authority for the obligat......
-
North Carolina Baptist Hospitals, Inc. v. Harris
...have imposed liability on the wife where the husband is unable to pay for his own necessaries. See, e.g., Borgess Medical Center v. Smith, 149 Mich.App. 796, 386 N.W.2d 684 (1986); Marshfield Clinic v. Discher, 105 Wisc.2d 506, 314 N.W.2d 326 (1982). One jurisdiction reaching this issue rec......