Memorial Hospital v. Woolf, No. 9795
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Rhode Island |
| Writing for the Court | ANDREWS |
| Citation | 86 R.I. 357,134 A.2d 397 |
| Parties | MEMORIAL HOSPITAL v. Samuel WOOLF et al. Ex. |
| Decision Date | 16 August 1957 |
| Docket Number | No. 9795 |
Page 397
v.
Samuel WOOLF et al.
Page 398
[86 R.I. 361] David Hassenfeld, Providence, for plaintiff.
Rosenstein & Jacques, Aram K. Berberian, Providence, for defendants.
[86 R.I. 358] ANDREWS, Justice.
This is an action of the case in assumpsit on book account and the common counts. It was commenced in the district court of the sixth judicial district where, by agreement of counsel, decision was given for the plaintiff, a foreign corporation, against the defendants Samuel Woolf and Eunice F. Kalver. The defendants then appealed the case to the superior court where it was assigned to the nonjury calendar. Thereafter the plaintiff requested a dedimus to take the deposition of its employee Julian L. Weller. The deposition was taken, but at that time the defendants were not represented.
When the case came on for hearing in the superior court the deposition was read. It appears therefrom that Jeanette Woolf, of the city of Providence in this state, was admitted to the plaintiff hospital on December 1, 1954 where she remained for forty-nine days. The deposition and the [86 R.I. 359] hospital records which were introduced show that Samuel Woolf of Providence was the patient's husband and that at the time of his wife's admission Mrs. E. J. Kalver of Providence, who was a daughter of the patient, agreed to pay the hospital charges. The witness Weller testified: 'Based on her promise, and the responsibility of Samuel Woolf, the patient's husband, for necessaries furnished to his wife, all the subsequent hospital care and services were rendered to the patient.' He also testified to the reasonableness of the charges.
At the end of plaintiff's case defendants' counsel moved for a nonsuit on behalf of defendant Eunice F. Kalver on the ground that there was no specific count or statement
Page 399
in the declaration that 'ties in' said defendant. The motion was denied whereupon he said: 'We have no defense Your Honor.' The court and counsel proceeded to discuss the amount of interest on the principal claim of $814.20. There was some difference between the attorneys as to what the interest was, so the court decided that question and gave decision for the plaintiff against both defendants for $850.66 and costs. No exception was taken at that time although the next day another attorney on behalf of defendants took an exception to the decision. That is...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Landmark Medical Center v. Gauthier, No. 93-61-A
...are necessary and the charges are reasonable, there is a prima facie case for the payment of the amount due. Memorial Hospital v. Woolf, 86 R.I. 357, 360, 134 A.2d 397, 399 For these reasons we answer the first question by finding that Claire is liable to Landmark for the services rendered ......
-
State v. Andrews, No. 9697
...425 134 A.2d 425 86 R.I. 341 STATE v. Edward J. ANDREWS. Ex. No. 9697. Supreme Court of Rhode Island. Aug. 16, 1957. [86 R.I. 357] Page 427 William E. Powers, Atty. Gen., Raymond J. Pettine, Asst. Atty. Gen., Providence, for State. John Quattrocchi, Jr., Providence, for defendant. [86 R.I. ......
-
Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. v. French, SOCONY-VACUUM
...to the decision the excepting party may bring before it any error that inheres in that decision. Memorial Hospital v. Woolf, R.I., 134 A.2d 397, 399, and cases therein The petitioner owns and operates in the town of East Providence a large oil refining plant. Its property crosses the town f......
-
Imperial-Yuma Production v. Hunter, IMPERIAL-YUMA
...initials were substituted for the first names of individuals or where a corporate name was shortened. See Memorial Hospital v. Woolf, 86 R.I. 357, 134 A.2d 397 (1957); McCracken v. Citizens' National Bank of Akron, 80 Colo. 164, 249 P. 652 (1926); State v. Johnson, 293 S.W.2d 907 (Mo.1956);......
-
Landmark Medical Center v. Gauthier, No. 93-61-A
...are necessary and the charges are reasonable, there is a prima facie case for the payment of the amount due. Memorial Hospital v. Woolf, 86 R.I. 357, 360, 134 A.2d 397, 399 For these reasons we answer the first question by finding that Claire is liable to Landmark for the services rendered ......
-
State v. Andrews, No. 9697
...425 134 A.2d 425 86 R.I. 341 STATE v. Edward J. ANDREWS. Ex. No. 9697. Supreme Court of Rhode Island. Aug. 16, 1957. [86 R.I. 357] Page 427 William E. Powers, Atty. Gen., Raymond J. Pettine, Asst. Atty. Gen., Providence, for State. John Quattrocchi, Jr., Providence, for defendant. [86 R.I. ......
-
Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. v. French, SOCONY-VACUUM
...to the decision the excepting party may bring before it any error that inheres in that decision. Memorial Hospital v. Woolf, R.I., 134 A.2d 397, 399, and cases therein The petitioner owns and operates in the town of East Providence a large oil refining plant. Its property crosses the town f......
-
Imperial-Yuma Production v. Hunter, IMPERIAL-YUMA
...initials were substituted for the first names of individuals or where a corporate name was shortened. See Memorial Hospital v. Woolf, 86 R.I. 357, 134 A.2d 397 (1957); McCracken v. Citizens' National Bank of Akron, 80 Colo. 164, 249 P. 652 (1926); State v. Johnson, 293 S.W.2d 907 (Mo.1956);......