Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-37 (2026)

(Formerly Sec. 46-10). Joint duty of spouses to support family. Liability for purchases and certain expenses. Abandonment

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Any purchase made by either a husband or wife in his or her own name shall be presumed, in the absence of notice to the contrary, to be made by him or her as an individual and he or she shall be liable for the purchase.

(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of this section, it shall be the joint duty of each spouse to support his or her family, and both shall be liable for: (1) The reasonable and necessary services of a physician or dentist; (2) hospital expenses rendered the husband or wife or minor child while residing in the family of his or her parents; (3) the rental of any dwelling unit actually occupied by the husband and wife as a residence and reasonably necessary to them for that purpose; and (4) any article purchased by either which has in fact gone to the support of the family, or for the joint benefit of both.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of this section, a spouse who abandons his or her spouse without cause shall be liable for the reasonable support of such other spouse while abandoned.

(d) No action may be maintained against either spouse under the provisions of this section, either during or after any period of separation from the other spouse, for any liability incurred by the other spouse during the separation, if, during the separation the spouse who is liable for support of the other spouse has provided the other spouse with reasonable support.

(e) Abandonment without cause by a spouse shall be a defense to any liability pursuant to the provisions of subdivisions (1) to (4), inclusive, of subsection (b) of this section for expenses incurred by and for the benefit of such spouse. Nothing in this subsection shall affect the duty of a parent to support his or her minor child.

(1949 Rev., S. 7308; 1957, P.A. 191; P.A. 77-288, S. 1; P.A. 78-230, S. 17, 54; P.A. 88-364, S. 58, 123; P.A. 92-140; P.A. 01-195, S. 35, 181.)

History: P.A. 77-288 rephrased section, referring to spouse where previously either husband or wife was specified, added exception re liability for expenses of last illness of deceased spouse and deleted provision which required that husband's property be first applied to support family and entitled wife to indemnity from husband's property for any of her property which was taken or money she was compelled to pay for satisfaction of claims; P.A. 78-230 divided section into Subsecs., rearranging and restating provisions, and deleted provision re liability for expenses of last illness; Sec. 46-10 transferred to Sec. 46b-37 in 1979; P.A. 88-364 changed the first word of Subsec. (a) from “all” to “any”; P.A. 92-140 deleted former Subdivs. (5) and (6) of Subsec. (b), inserted new Subsec. (c) re liability of spouse who abandons spouse without cause, relettering former Subsec. (c) as (d), and added Subsec. (e) re abandonment by spouse as defense to expenses; P.A. 01-195 made a technical change in Subsec. (b) for purposes of gender neutrality, effective July 11, 2001.

Annotations to former section 46-10:

Not necessary to first obtain judgment against husband, and have execution returned unsatisfied; plaintiff may sue on implied promise created by statute. 52 C. 406. Father not obliged to support child unlawfully detained by mother. 68 C. 256. Liability of husband for goods purchased for family not limited to those necessary or reasonable. 77 C. 390; 93 C. 453; Id., 515. Husband is liable for wife's reasonable apparel even though he has not abandoned her. 93 C. 515. That goods were purchased by wife in foreign country is immaterial. Id., 516. “While abandoned by her husband” qualifies next preceding clause only. Id., 515; 94 C. 267. If goods in fact went to support of family, husband's prior notice to seller not to extend credit to wife is no defense. Id., 267. Whether a plastic surgery operation to improve husband's facial appearance is a “reasonable and necessary” expense depends on all circumstances. 100 C. 168. Common law liability to provide necessaries to wife exists independently of statute; scope thereof. 102 C. 705. Necessary allegations in action on statute. Id., 706. Cited. 108 C. 730. Wife is not jointly responsible for every business obligation husband undertakes. 111 C. 306; 115 C. 295; 131 C. 156; 134 C. 332; 142 C. 375; Id., 553; 143 C. 443; 144 C. 21. There must be a direct relationship between article purchased and the family benefit. 121 C. 663; 124 C. 249. Under former statute, it was immaterial that husband supported wife. 112 C. 64. “Family” includes wife. Id.; 131 C. 156. In tort action, husband entitled to medical expenses for wife's injuries, both past and future. 122 C. 338. Statute does not make wife guarantor but may make her liable on an implied promise; husband has primary obligation to support and may be liable to wife for past support; her claim is legal rather than equitable and 6-year limitation applies. 124 C. 251. Payment by husband did not toll statute of limitations as to wife. 125 C. 202. However, in suit by wife against husband, she may recover such expenses if creditors look to her for payment. 126 C. 146. Her claim not defeated by reason of having private means. 132 C. 80. Three bases of recovery when creditor sues husband for goods furnished wife. Id., 77. If wife lives apart without justification, husband's obligation to support is suspended. 136 C. 685. Husband and wife cannot make contract with each other concerning maintenance or custody of child which court is compelled to enforce. 137 C. 74. Undertaker's services are not included in those purchases to which statute applies. Id., 450. Does not modify common law determining conditions excusing husband from obligation to support wife or child. 138 C. 6. Plaintiff not entitled to recover where her estate had not been depleted in any way and she had not expended money of her own for support. Id., 701. Husband must provide for his wife and child within the reasonable limits of his ability. 142 C. 553. Wife's doctors' bills cannot be recovered from husband as damages in tort action. 145 C. 663. Cited. 155 C. 545. In action by wife for indemnification of money paid out by her for support of herself and children, it is immaterial whether second ground for divorce was found where it was proved defendant had committed adultery and wife was fully justified in living apart from and divorcing him for that reason. 156 C. 628. Cited. 162 C. 546. Section does not exempt wife from any legal obligation towards family; husband has primary duty to support family, but wife is also liable for family expenses. 170 C. 258. Cited. 175 C. 527.

Circumstances under which indemnity is available to wife under section. 3 CS 211. Cited. 4 CS 144. There is no statute of limitations affecting this claim. 5 CS 459. Recovery by wife for expenditures for support of the family allowed only for payments actually made. 7 CS 153; 17 CS 208. Wife's right to indemnity is not defeated because she has private means. 13 CS 474; 17 CS 189; 20 CS 9. Cited. 14 CS 128. Liability of husband and wife for medical and hospital expenses rendered a minor child living with them does not exclude a minor married child. 16 CS 84. Conditions under which wife living apart entitled to sums expended and to be expended by her for reasonable necessities for support of family. Id., 235. Cited. 17 CS 189. Where wife left husband without just cause and where her return to him was not in good faith, he was justified in living apart and equitable support was denied wife. 23 CS 221. In absence of divorce, husband has primary obligation of paying for support, medical care and burial of wife, and person advancing money for those purposes can recover from husband; such person has legally protected interest adversely affected by purported divorce decree and may therefore attack decree. Id., 306. Judgment against wife leaves unaffected right to indemnification from husband. 30 CS 593. Wife may sue for husband's medical expenses for which she is liable. 32 CS 156. Liability for certain expenses. 33 CS 44.

Annotations to present section:

Cited. 186 C. 167; 200 C. 290. Abandonment is a defense to liability. 206 C. 31. Cited. 234 C. 194; 235 C. 82.

Cited. 3 CA 392; 21 CA 200; 26 CA 737.

Cited. 44 CS 169; 45 CS 84.

Subsec. (b):

Subdiv. (4): Spousal liability does not include nursing home expenses or services or expenses associated with nursing home care, including food and medicine consumed by a nursing home resident. 299 C. 819.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 33 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2022 · leading case: Yale Univ. Sch. of Med. v. Collier, 536 A.2d 588 (Conn. 1988).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Yale Univ. Sch. of Med. v. Collier, 536 A.2d 588 (Conn. 1988). · cites it 25× “Actions were brought by both Yale-New Haven Hospital and Yale University School of Medicine/Office of Professional Services, seeking payment pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-37, 1 from the named defendant Esther Collier, 2 for medical services rendered to Lester Collier, her…”

Calway v. Calway, 603 A.2d 434 (Conn. App. Ct. 1992). · cites it 26× “The questions presented in this appeal are (1) whether the plaintiff, pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-37, 1 has a *739 continuing obligation after a dissolution of marriage to pay a portion of the cost of unreimbursed medical expenses of his minor children when the…”

McPhee v. McPhee, 440 A.2d 274 (Conn. 1982). · cites it 8× “General Statutes § 46b-37 (b). [4] *176 The defendant also claims that the court erred in ordering that the plaintiff's obligation under the promissory note reflecting alimony would cease upon "her hospitalization resulting from a voluntary resumption of the cause of her past…”

Yale Diagnostic Radiology v. Est. of Fountain, 838 A.2d 179 (Conn. 2004). · cites it 13× “The Probate Court denied the motion, reasoning that, pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-37 (b), 3 parents are liable for medical services rendered *355 to their minor children, and that a parent’s refusal or inability to pay for those services does not render the minor child…”

Wilton Meadows Ltd. P'ship v. Coratolo, 14 A.3d 982 (Conn. 2011). · cites it 37× “1 General Statutes § 46b-37 provides in relevant part: “(a) Any purchase made by either a husband or wife in his or her own name shall be presumed, in the absence of notice to the contrary, to be made by him or her as an individual and he or she shall be liable for the purchase.”

Stamford Hosp. v. Schwartz, 209 A.3d 1243 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 9× “The child resided in the defendants' home, and, therefore, pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-37 (b), 3 the defendants are liable for the cost of the medical services rendered by the plaintiff.”

Febbroriello v. Febbroriello, 572 A.2d 1032 (Conn. App. Ct. 1990). · cites it 7× “See General Statutes § 46b-37. Although we conclude that the pendente lite orders lapsed with the court’s dismissal of the case and that no agreement survived that dismissal, we, nevertheless, hold that the trial court did not err in ordering the defendant to pay the plaintiff…”

Newman v. Newman, 663 A.2d 980 (Conn. 1995). · cites it 5× “of forming intelligent preference); General Statutes § 46b-57 (requiring court, in making any order granting custody to third party, to consider the wishes of child, if child is of sufficient age and capable of forming intelligent preference); General Statutes § 46b-55 (b)…”

In re Bruce R., 662 A.2d 107 (Conn. 1995). · cites it 4× “, General Statutes § 46b-37 (b) (“it shall be the joint duty of each spouse to support his or her family”); General Statutes §§ 52-362b, 52-362c and 52-362Í (child support can be withheld from paychecks of parents or from unemployment compensation); General Statutes § 52-362e…”

Considine v. City of Waterbury, 905 A.2d 70 (Conn. 2006). · cites it 2× “2d 179 (2004) (concluding that General Statutes § 46b-37 [b] [2] codifies common-law rule that “both parents are primarily responsible for providing necessary goods and services to their children”); Gerrity v.”

Dzenutis v. Dzenutis, 512 A.2d 130 (Conn. 1986). · cites it 3× “These statutes have now been supplanted by General Statutes § 46b-37, which expressly imposes liability for medical expenses incurred in the treatment of a husband, wife or minor child residing with its parents upon both husband and wife jointly. The provisions of earlier…”

Lawrence v. Gude, 216 Conn. App. 624 (Conn. App. Ct. 2022). · cites it 31× “On appeal, the plaintiff argues that the court improperly found that Adriana was not liable for back rent and use and occupancy under the lease pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-37 (b) (3).1 We agree and, accordingly, reverse in part the judgment of the court.”

Show all 33 citing cases →

— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-37(b) — 2 cases

Cadle Co. v. DiFabio (In Re DiFabio), 314 B.R. 281 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2004).

United States v. Cohn, 855 F. Supp. 572 (D. Conn. 1994).

— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-37(c) — 1 case

In Re Varian, 91 B.R. 653 (Bankr. D. Conn. 1988).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.