283 A.D. 794 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1954
In an action for false arrest and malicious prosecution, defendants moved under rule 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice to strike certain allegations from the complaint as irrelevant and prejudicial. The motion was granted and plaintiff appeals. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. By the allegations of paragraphs “ Twelfth ”, “ Thirteenth ”, “ Twenty-Seventh ” and “ Twenty-Eighth ”, which were struck out at Special Term, plaintiff sought to recover damages for loss of consortium and medical expenses incurred in attempting to cure his wife of her mental illness, allegedly resulting from defendants’ willful acts, which were directed against plaintiff alone. Such damages may not be recovered in an action such as this. The right of a husband to recover must be tested by the right of the wife to recover the damages accruing to her personally for the injuries which caused the loss of consortium and the consequent expenses to the husband. No facts are pleaded which would justify a recovery by plaintiff’s wife for the injuries alleged. (Garrison V. Sun Print. <& Pub. Assn., 207 N. Y. 1, 10; Wilson v. Goit, 17 N. Y. 442; Hutchinson v. Stern, 115 App. Div. 791, appeal dismissed 189 N. Y. 577; Roher v. State of New York, 279 App. Div. Ill 6.) The allegations of paragraph “Twentieth” of the complaint to the effect that plaintiff had no knowledge
