Husband and wife contract toward each other obligations of mutual respect, fidelity and support.

History: Laws 1907, ch. 37, § 1; Code 1915, § 2744; C.S. 1929, § 68-101; 1941 Comp., § 65-201; 1953 Comp., § 57-2-1.

Cross references. — For dissolution of marriage, see 40-4-1 to 40-4-20 NMSA 1978.

For Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, see 40-6A-100 NMSA 1978.

As a general rule, spouses are permitted to sue each other for intentional torts. Papatheofanis v. Allen, 2010-NMCA-036, 148 N.M. 791, 242 P.3d 358, cert. quashed, 2010-NMCERT-011, 150 N.M. 490, 262 P.3d 1143.

Claims for intentional torts between spouses. — Where, during the marriage of plaintiff and defendant, defendant induced plaintiff to convey a one-half interest in the family home, which was plaintiff's solely owned property, to defendant by representing to plaintiff that if plaintiff died, the parties' child would not have an interest in the home; defendant falsely commenced a domestic violence claim against plaintiff; defendant falsely reported to plaintiff's employer that plaintiff was misusing government property at plaintiff's workplace; without the knowledge or permission of plaintiff, defendant opened credit card accounts by forging plaintiff's name on application forms, leased a vehicle using plaintiff's information, and registered a patent in defendant's name using plaintiff's intellectual property; and defendant was an attorney and a mortgage loan officer, the jury verdict in plaintiff's action against defendant finding defendant liable for fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, malicious abuse of process, and defamation was supported by substantial evidence. Papatheofanis v. Allen, 2010-NMCA-036, 148 N.M. 791, 242 P.3d 358, cert. quashed, 2010-NMCERT-011, 150 N.M. 490, 262 P.3d 1143

Abatement of alimony is properly granted where it is shown that a wife has procured a divorce on cross-complaint in her husband's suit for divorce; that she had received $22,500 in a property settlement and an award of $60.00 per month alimony; that she had no children, but was the sole support of her mother; that she had remarried but was suing to have the second marriage annulled on the ground of fraud. Mindlin v. Mindlin, 1937-NMSC-012, 41 N.M. 155, 66 P.2d 260.

Alimony accruing subsequent to remarriage. — Where divorced wife admitted her remarriage and no proof of such exceptional circumstances as would justify a continuance of the husband's duty to support his ex-wife subsequent to her remarriage, it appeared trial court erred in awarding wife alimony accruing subsequent to her remarriage. Kuert v. Kuert, 1956-NMSC-002, 60 N.M. 432, 292 P.2d 115, superseded by statute, Galassi v. Galassi, 2009-NMCA-026, 145 N.M. 630, 203 P.3d 161.

Alimony after remarriage not good public policy unless exceptional circumstances. — When the wife contracts a subsequent marriage with another, thus creating a duty of support in him, good public policy does not demand that she continue to receive support from her first husband unless she prove exceptional circumstances. Kuert v. Kuert, 1956-NMSC-002, 60 N.M. 432, 292 P.2d 115, superseded by statute, Galassi v. Galassi, 2009-NMCA-026, 145 N.M. 630, 203 P.3d 161.

Proof of remarriage establishes case for alimony modification. — Proof of his former wife's remarriage establishes the divorced husband's prima facie case for modification of alimony payments coming due subsequent to such remarriage. Kuert v. Kuert, 1956-NMSC-002, 60 N.M. 432, 292 P.2d 115, superseded by statute, Galassi v. Galassi, 2009-NMCA-026, 145 N.M. 630, 203 P.3d 161.

Wife's mother entitled to recover from husband for necessities. — In the case of a wife whose husband neglected and abandoned her when she was sick in bed and without provisions, and her mother took her home and provided her with the necessities of life, including nursing and medical care, the mother was entitled to recover of the husband the cost of such necessities. Nicholas v. Bickford, 1940-NMSC-018, 44 N.M. 210, 100 P.2d 906 (decided under former law).

When husband fails to provide necessities. — In suit by a mother against her daughter's husband for necessaries furnished the daughter by the mother, it must appear that the husband had failed to provide the necessaries, including medical care. Nicholas v. Bickford, 1940-NMSC-018, 44 N.M. 210, 100 P.2d 906 (decided under former law).

Father entitled to recovery for support furnished wife. — In action for divorce the wife is not entitled to recovery for support furnished her by her father as cause of action for such support, if any, is vested in the father. Harper v. Harper, 1950-NMSC-024, 54 N.M. 194, 217 P.2d 857 (decided under former law).

Husband's liability for medical services. — A husband is not liable for medical services rendered his wife upon her individual written promise to pay therefor, it not being shown that he had neglected to furnish or provide for adequate service of the kind. Chevallier v. Connors, 1927-NMSC-084, 33 N.M. 93, 262 P. 173 (decided under former law).

Removal of wife from county to defeat recovery on note. — Agreement by husband to remove his wife from the county of their domicile, and to keep her out of the county, was not such an illegal contract as could be availed of by the maker of a promissory note to defeat recovery thereon. Dominguez v. Rocas, 1929-NMSC-072, 34 N.M. 317, 281 P. 25 (decided under former law).

Duty of support is owed from husband to wife at common law and under this section. 1963 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 63-151.

Remarriage of wife relieves former husband of the duty of support of the ex-wife as of her remarriage. 1963 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 63-151.

Law reviews. — For symposium, "The Effects of an Equal Rights Amendment on the New Mexico System of Community Property: Problems of Characterization, Management and Control," see 3 N.M.L. Rev. 11 (1973).

For symposium, "Equal Rights in Divorce and Separation," see 3 N.M.L. Rev. 118 (1973).

For article, "The Community Property Act of 1973: A Commentary and Quasi-Legislative History," see 5 N.M.L. Rev. 1 (1974).

For article, "Arbitration of Domestic Relations Disputes in New Mexico," see 16 N.M.L. Rev. 321 (1986).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 73 Am. Jur. 2d Support of Persons §§ 21, 22.

Rights and remedies in respect of property accumulated by man and woman living together in illicit relations or under void marriage, 31 A.L.R.2d 1255.

Marriage as extinguishing contractual indebtedness between parties, 45 A.L.R.2d 722.

Husband's liability to third person for necessaries furnished wife separated from him, 60 A.L.R.2d 7.

Wife's liability for necessaries furnished husband, 11 A.L.R.4th 1160.

Necessity, in action against husband for necessaries furnished wife, or proving husband's failure to provide necessities, 19 A.L.R.4th 432.

Modern status of rule that husband is primarily or solely liable for necessaries furnished wife, 20 A.L.R.4th 196.