Haddad v. Chapin
| Decision Date | 23 July 1929 |
| Docket Number | 21716. |
| Citation | 279 P. 583,153 Wash. 163 |
| Parties | HADDAD v. CHAPIN. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 1.
Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County; Wm. A. Huneke, Judge.
Action by Haddad, a corporation, against Mabel K. Chapin, sued as Mrs. E. T. Chapin. From a judgment dismissing the action plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
M. E Mack, of Spokane, for appellant.
Randall & Danskin, of Spokane, for respondent.
This action was brought by the appellant, Haddad, a corporation against the respondent, Mabel K. Chapin, sued as Mrs. E. T Chapin, upon an account. The respondent interposed as a defense to the action the statute of limitations. This defense the trial court sustained and entered a judgment dismissing the action.
The facts giving rise to the action are not in dispute. The respondent was for many years the wife of E. T. Chapin, and was living with him as such at the time of his death, which occurred on September 8, 1924. Prior to her husband's death, and between September 17, 1923, and July 12, 1924, she and her husband, as a community, purchased merchandise from the appellant which was used for the support and maintenance of their family. The merchandise was purchased on a running account, and, during the period of the purchases, sundry payments were made thereon. The last of such payments was made on June 5, 1924, and there remained a balance of $617.85 due at the time of the death of the husband.
Shortly following the death of her husband, the respondent was appointed administratrix of his estate, and has since continuously acted as such. The appellant's account was presented and allowed as a claim against the estate, and two payments have been made thereon under the order of the court in which the administration proceedings are pending; the one a payment of 10 per cent. of the amount thereof, made on December 31, 1925, and the other a payment of 3 per cent., made on January 4, 1927. The record does not show the value of the estate that came into the possession of the administratrix, but the claims presented against the estate and allowed were large, aggregating more than $200,000. It is stated, however, that the estate is insolvent, and that but a small additional payment will be made on the claims. The payments made on the appellant's claim was, of course, a distributive share of the property of the estate, payable to all of the claimants alike.
The present action is against the respondent upon her personal liability for the payment of the account, and was instituted more than three years after its incurrence. It may be explained that the respondent's individual liability arises from statute. By the terms of the statute (Rem. Comp. Stat. § 6906), the expenses of the family are chargeable upon the property of both husband and wife, or the property of either of them, and in relation thereto they may be sued jointly or separately. It follows from the nature of the liability that the obligation of the separate spouses thereon arises when the account becomes due, and that neither the death of one of the spouses nor an administration proceeding on the estate of the deceased spouse will operate as an estoppel or a bar to an action against the surviving spouse. Payment from the estate of the deceased spouse will operate as a satisfaction of the claim, and a partial payment as a satisfaction pro tanto, and it may be that an estate paying the claim has no right of contribution against the surviving spouse, but the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harmon v. Department of Social and Health Services, State of Wash.
...and wives equally responsible for the necessary expenses of their families and the education of their children. Haddad v. Chapin, 153 Wash. 163, 164-65, 279 P. 583 (1929). The statute was enacted in derogation of common law, under which a RCW 26.16.205, the family expense statute, remained ......
-
In re De Nisson's Guardianship, 27254.
...that burial expenses of a deceased husband might be classed as a family expense within the meaning of the statute. In Haddad v. Chapin, 153 Wash. 163, 279 P. 583, it said that a wife was liable, under the statute, for merchandise purchased and used for the support and maintenance of the fam......
-
Abele v. Dietz
...which she also owed individually did not constitute an acknowledgment of personal liability that would toll the statute. Haddad v. Chapin, 153 Wash. 163, 279 P. 583. A like result has been reached where the joint debtor, with the knowledge of the creditor, made a payment in behalf of anothe......
-
Holland Bank v. Brockman
...(Haddad v. Chapin, 153 Wash. 163, 279 P. 583.) The surviving wife is not bound by her payment of interest as an administratrix. (Haddad v. Chapin, supra.) The plea of the bar of the statute of limitations is a valid defense. (Canadian Birkbeck etc. Co. v. Williamson, 32 Idaho 624, 186 P. 91......
-
Chapter §6.2 Contractual Liability and Other Nontort Obligations
...by one of the spouses that would toll the statute does not continue separate liability of the nonacting spouse. See Haddad v. Chapin, 153 Wash. 163, 279 P. 583 (1929). Whether the statute is tolled depends on the particular facts. See Burnham v. Burnham, 18 Wn. App. 1, 567 P.2d 242 (1977) (......
-
Chapter 15
...3.1, 3.1(5), 3.2(14)(a), 3.2(14)(e), 3.3, 3.3(1), 3.4(1)(b) Guyes Estate,In re, 54 Wash. 264, 103 P. 25 (1909): 4.13 H Haddad v.Chapin, 153 Wash. 163, 279 P. 583 (1929): 6.2(1) Hadley, In reMarriage of, 88 Wn.2d 649, 565 P.2d 790 (1977): 3.2(16), 5.1(1), 5.1(2), 5.1(3) Hagy, In reMarriage o......