60 Colo. 290 | Colo. | 1915
delivered the opinion of the court.
The question involved in this action is whether the Denver Dry Goods Company, plaintiff in error, may recover of M. H. Jester, the defendant in error, the value of certain goods which it sold to his wife, without his knowledge or consent, and while the Jesters were living separate and apart. Plaintiff in error claims that when the goods were sold the Jesters were living apart by mutual consent, and that such goods were necessaries within the meaning of the law, and that the husband had failed to supply his wife with the same, or make any provision for her support. The defendant in error contends that the goods were not necessaries, and that the living apart was not by mutual consent, but because the wife was guilty of violation of her marital
The burden is upon plaintiff in error to show reversible error, and having failed in that regard, the judgment is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Gabbert, C. J., and Bailey, J., concur.