Neilson v. Brown

Decision Date29 May 1882
Citation13 R.I. 651
PartiesNILS NEILSON v. WELCOME O. BROWN et als.
CourtRhode Island Supreme Court

A claimed damages resulting from the death of his wife charging the defendants with enticing her from him, and with so detaining her, slandering him, and reviling the marriage that she languished in mind and body, and died.

Held, on demurrer, that the claim was not within the scope of Pub. Stat. R.I. cap. 204, § 20.

Held, further, that an action on the claim could not be maintained.

A. also claimed damages for the defendants' refusal to allow him to attend his wife's funeral, which was arranged by them, and to view her body, which was in their charge.

Held, on demurrer, that an action on the claim could not be maintained.

Held, further, that A.'s right to the custody of his wife's body for burial did not involve a license to enter the premises of others who had not refused to deliver the body on demand therefor.

TRESPASS ON THE CASE. On demurrers to the declaration.

The plaintiff declared against the defendants as follows:

" Nils Neilson, of East Providence, in said county of Providence, complains of Welcome O. Brown, of the city and County of Providence, physician, in the custody of the sheriff, and of Elcy M. Chace, widow, and Huldah M. Beede, spinster, both of the said city and County of Providence, summoned by the sheriff in an action of the case.

1. For that whereas the said defendants contriving and wrongfully, wickedly, and unjustly intending to injure the said plaintiff, and to deprive him of the comfort, fellowship, society, aid and assistance of Elcy A. Neilson, the wife of the said plaintiff, and to alienate and destroy her affection for the said plaintiff, heretofore, to wit, on the day of, A. D. 1880, to wit, at Providence, aforesaid, unlawfully, wrongfully, and unjustly enticed, persuaded, and procured the said Elcy A. Neilson, so then being the wife of the said plaintiff as aforesaid, to depart from the home, fellowship, society, bed and board of her said husband, said plaintiff, by means of which said enticement, persuasion, and procurement the said Elcy A. Neilson, so being such wife of said plaintiff as aforesaid, then and there, to wit, on the day and year aforesaid, to wit, at said Providence aforesaid, without the license or consent and against the will of the said plaintiff, departed from and out of the home, fellowship, society, bed and board of her said husband, said plaintiff, and remained and continued absent from such fellowship, society, bed and board for a long space of time, to wit, from thence to the time of the death of said Elcy A. Neilson, on, to wit, the 28th day of January, A. D. 1881, whereby the plaintiff lost the comfort, fellowship, company, society, aid and assistance of his said wife in his domestic affairs all the time she remained so absent as aforesaid, which said plaintiff, during all that time, ought to have had and otherwise might and would have had, to wit, at Providence aforesaid.

2. And also for that said Elcy A. Neilson in the first count aforesaid mentioned, on, to wit, the 28th day of January, A. D. 1881, to wit, at said Providence, and during the time that she was so absent from the fellowship, society, bed and board of said plaintiff by the persuasion, procurement, and enticement of said defendants, as set forth in the first count aforesaid, and while she was the lawful wife of said plaintiff, died, and upon and after her said death her body was and remained to and including the time of her burial, on, to wit, the day of, A. D. 1881, to wit, at said Providence, in the care, charge, and custody of said defendants; said defendants then and there wrongfully, unlawfully, and unjustly forbade, prevented, and refused said plaintiff from seeing said body of his said wife, and from attending her funeral and funeral services, whereby said plaintiff suffered, and thence hitherto has suffered great anguish, grief, and sorrow of mind, and great mental and bodily injury.

3. And also for that whereas at and prior to the aforesaid enticement, persuasion, and procurement by said defendant...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Presley v. Newport Hospital, 74-188-A
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Supreme Court
    • 8 Noviembre 1976
    ...R.I. 34, 188 A.2d 467 (1963); Gorman v. Budlong, 23 R.I. 169, 49 A. 704 (1901); Miller v. Coffin, 19 R.I. 164, 36 A. 6 (1895); Neilson v. Brown, 13 R.I. 651 (1882). Today our Wrongful Death Act, G.L.1956 (1969 Reenactment) ch. 7 of title 10, affords two separate causes of action. One is a r......
  • Sanzi v. Shetty
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Superior Court
    • 12 Junio 2002
    ...was precluded where the decedent-employee had no substantive legal right at the time to recover against a fellow servant); Neilson v. Brown, 13 R.I. 651 (1882) (wrongful action barred where wife had no substantive right to sue for being enticed away from her husband). A statute of limitatio......
  • Duval v. Hunt
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 19 Julio 1894
    ...bar or defeat will bar and defeat a recovery for his death by any one suing on that behalf. Pym v. Railway Co., 2 Best & S. 759; Neilson v. Brown, 13 R.I. 651; Death Wrongf. Act, §§ 63-65, and citations. It is asserted in the briefs of the plaintiff in error that the doctrine of comparative......
  • St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company v. Allen
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 8 Junio 1908
    ...a suit for the benefit of the widow and next of kin. 53 Ark. 117; 68 Id. 1; Tiffany on Death by Wrongful Act (Ed. 1893), § 63, citing 13 R. I. 651; 40 Ga. 52; 38 Id. 2. Appellant was under no such legal obligation to provide surgical attention as would make it liable in case of failure to p......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT