Luther Hospital v. Garborg, 529
| Decision Date | 23 February 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 529,529 |
| Citation | 238 N.W.2d 529,71 Wis.2d 460 |
| Parties | LUTHER HOSPITAL, a Wisconsin Corporation, Respondent, v. Ivar T. GARBORG, Appellant. (1974). |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
David G. Anderson, and Garvey, O'Brien, Anderson & Kelly, Eau Claire, for appellant.
Eugene J. La Fave and Adler, La Fave & Johnson, Eau Claire, for respondent.
Defendant appeals from a judgment against him for hospital care and services rendered to his wife. At the time she was admitted to the hospital, an action for divorce was pending. The family court commissioner had issued a temporary order providing that the wife should pay for her own necessities and personal expenditures. A divorce was subsequently granted to the defendant on grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment. Later, the wife declared bankruptcy and her debt to the hospital was discharged.
Defendant acknowledges his common law obligation to support his wife, but argues that the order of the family court commissioner terminated the obligation to pay for his wife's necessities while she was living apart during the divorce action. He relies on the rule that compliance with a provision made for support of the wife in the form of temporary alimony, discharges the husband's common law obligation of support. Holiday Hospital Association v. Schwarz (1964) (Fla.App.), 166 So.2d 493.
The question in this case is whether the order of the family court commissioner was intended as an award of support. The trial judge held that was not the purpose of the order. The entire order is not in the record, because this case was submitted on stipulated facts. The portion of the order quoted in the stipulation provides:
'5 . . . It is further ordered that the plaintiff pay for her own necessities and personal expenditures; that the defendant pay all other family expenses as they come due.'
The quoted portion of the order does not constitute an award of alimony under the classical definition that alimony is an allowance which the husband is compelled to pay his wife for her maintenance when she is living apart from his or has been divorced from him. Weihert v. Weihert (1953), 265 Wis. 438, 61 N.W.2d 890. The quoted language did not order the defendant to pay anything for support of his wife. Therefore, compliance with the order did not satisfy the defendant's obligation of support.
Defendant, citing Richardson v. Stuesser (1905), 125 Wis. 66, 103 N.W. 261, argues that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stromsted's Estate, Matter of
...medical services is borne by the husband and not the wife has been repeated on numerous occasions. See e. g., Luther Hospital v. Garborg, 71 Wis.2d 460, 462, 238 N.W.2d 529 (1976); Seitz v. Seitz, 35 Wis.2d 282, 295, 151 N.W.2d 86 (1967); Fischer v. Fischer, 31 Wis.2d 293, 309, 142 N.W.2d 8......
-
Sinai Samaritan Medical Center, Inc. v. McCabe, 95-0012
...from having to provide for his wife's medical treatment when she is away from his home unreasonably. See Luther Hosp. v. Garborg, 71 Wis.2d 460, 461-462, 238 N.W.2d 529, 530-531 (1976). We Section 766.55(2)(a), STATS., provides that "[a]fter the determination date ... [a] spouse's obligatio......