holding that a wife is not liable, simply by virtue of the marital relationship, for her husband’s fraudulent acts
How later courts described this case
- holding that a wife is not liable, simply by virtue of the marital relationship, for her husband’s fraudulent acts
- “We are of the opinion that the marital relationship alone does not render one spouse liable for the fraudulent actions of the other. A spouse may, however, ratify the fraudulent act of the other so as to become liable for the fraud itself by accepting or retaining the benefits of the act knowing it was tainted with fraud.”
- marital relationship alone does not render one spouse, liable for the fraudulent actions of the other
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
OPINION ON PETITION TO REHEAR
FONES, Justice.
Petition to rehear has been filed on behalf of appellant, Barbara R. Anderson, questioning the grounds upon which this Court held her liable for certain fraudulent misrepresentations and concealments.
The petition seeks to reiterate appellants original position and to re-argue matters which counsel insists were improperly decided. It raises substantially the same issue heretofore fully considered and discloses no material fact or proposition of law overlooked or misapprehended by this Court upon which the parties have not been heard.
The petition to rehear is accordingly overruled at the cost of appellant.
BROCK, C.J., COOPER and HARBI-SON, JJ., and BYERS, Special Judge, concur.