Gerlach v. Turner

Citations

• 89 Cal. 446
• 26 P. 870
• 1891 Cal. LEXIS 835

Syllabus

<p>Appeal — Review op Nonsuit — Error op Law — Specification in New-trial Statement. — A nonsuit may be reviewed as au error of law, if excepted to and specified as such in the statement on motion for new trial.</p> <p>Physicians — Action for Medical Services — Husband and Wife — Invalid Divorce from Former Wife — Evidence — Hearsay — Non-suit. — In an action against a husband for medical services rendered to his wife, where it appears that the parties had been regularly married, and for a number of years afterward lived together as husband and wife, until they learned that the divorce of the husband from his former wife was invalid, but the only evidence as to the divorce was hearsay, called out on cross-examination, the conclusion that the parties were in fact husband and wife is not overcome, and the granting of a nonsuit is erroneous.</p> <p>Id. — Services Rendered to Reputed Wife — Liability of Reputed Husband. — A party calling a physician to attend a person whom he represents to he his wife is liable therefor, and the fact that the parties are not in fact legally married does not release him from the obligation to pay for the physician’s services.</p> <p>Id. —Estoppel by Conduct. — Where the conduct of the party calling the physician was such as to amount to an explicit representation that he was her husband, he is estopped from asserting its falsity after the physician has rendered services on the faith of such representation.</p> <p>Id. —Notice to Physician of Invalid Marriage— Continuance of Employment. — The fact that the physician was informed toward the last of his visits, by both the reputed husband and the patient, that they were not married, does not release the reputed husband from his liability, where he fails to plainly and unequivocally put an end to the employment at the time he informed the physician of his true relation, toward the patient.</p>