Bissonnette v. Bissonnette

Eloise Bissonnette v. Henry R. Bissonnette

Bissonnette v. Bissonnette, 142 A.2d 527 (Conn. 1958)

Court: Supreme Court of Connecticut · State Highest Courts
Decided: May 27, 1958
Citations: 142 A.2d 527145 Conn. 733

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff is the wife of the defendant. They are residents of this state. While in Massachusetts on August 29, 1956, an automobile *734 owned and operated by the defendant was involved in an accident. His wife, a passenger in the car, was injured. She brought suit against her husband in the Superior Court to recover for her injuries. The court sustained a demurrer to the complaint on the ground that under the laws of Massachusetts suits between husband and wife are not authorized and, since no cause of action arose in that state, the suit could not be prosecuted here. Prom the judgment rendered upon her failure to plead over, the plaintiff has appealed.

The creation and. extent of liability in tort are fixed by the law of the state in which the tort is committed. In this case it is the law of Massachusetts. If the wife could not sue her husband in Massachusetts, she could not maintain an action in this state to enforce a right which did not exist there. We are dealing with a substantive right. The Massachusetts law provides that married women may sue and be sued as though single, but suits between husband and wife are not authorized. Mass. Ann. Laws c. 209, § 6 (1955); Callow v. Thomas, 322 Mass. 550, 551 , 78 N.E.2d 637 . As the plaintiff never had a cause of action in Massachusetts, she has none here. Bohenek v. Niedzwiecki, 142 Conn. 278, 282 , 113 A.2d 509 , and cases cited therein.

There is no error.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 19 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

Patch v. Stanley Works448 F.2d 483 (2d Cir. 1971)
Halstead v. United States535 F. Supp. 782 (D. Conn. 1982)
Mildred A. Patch, Administratrix of the Estate of Parker P. Patch, and v. The Stanley Works (Stanley Chemical Company Division) and Thomas Keller, and448 F.2d 483 (2d Cir. 1971)
Parks v. BALDWIN PIANO AND ORGAN COMPANY262 F. Supp. 515 (D. Conn. 1967)
Wolozin v. Wolozin182 A.2d 8 (Conn. 1962)
Gibson v. Fullin374 A.2d 1061 (Conn. 1977)

Most recent

O'Connor v. O'Connor492 A.2d 207 (Conn. App. Ct. 1985)
Katherine H. Saloomey, Administratrix, Estate of Willard Vernon Wahlund, Deceased v. Jeppesen & Co., Peter C707 F.2d 671 (2d Cir. 1983)
Saloomey v. Jeppesen & Co.707 F.2d 671 (2d Cir. 1983) · Dissent
Halstead v. United States535 F. Supp. 782 (D. Conn. 1982)
K-Mart Corp. v. Midcon Realty Group of Connecticut, Ltd.489 F. Supp. 813 (D. Conn. 1980)
Saharceski v. Marcure366 N.E.2d 1245 (Mass. 1977)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Callow v. Thomas, 78 N.E.2d 637 (Mass. 1948)	28
	Bohenek v. Niedzwiecki, 113 A.2d 509 (Conn. 1955)	20

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list