
    NEGLEY v. STONE.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    November 7, 1900.)
    Married Woman—Set-Off—Medical Services—Liability.
    In an action by a married woman, the defendant was not entitled- to set off the value of his medical services to plaintiff and her family, since her husband, and not she, was liable for such services.
    Appeal from municipal court, borough of Manhattan. ■
    Action by Ida M. C. Negley against William P. Stone. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
    Reversed.
    Argued before TRUAX, P. J., and SCOTT and DUG-RO, JJ.
    C. I. Schampain, for appellant.
    W. E. Deane, for respondent."
   PER CURIAM.

The fact that the plaintiff collected rent for more than a year and a half after April, 1898, raises a very strong presumption that the defendant did not owe rent for April, 1898. In fact there is no evidence in the case that the defendant rented the premises for the month of April, 1898. The learned justice should not have allowed the defendant’s set-off for $80 for medical attendance to the plaintiff. According to the defendant’s testimony, nothing was said about his rendering free medical attendance to the plaintiff or her family. If the defendant was employed, the husband of the plaintiff is liable in law, and not the plaintiff herself. This, evidently, was the defendant’s understanding, for the bill rendered by bim was made out to the husband of the plaintiff, and not to the plaintiff. Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs.  