## Facts

- Karen Buckstaff signed a special-order purchase agreement for a Henredon 6800 sofa, payable $621.50 within 60 days after receipt, with 1.5% monthly interest on unpaid balances after 60 days.
- Karen signed only in her own name, and no representation was made that she acted as her husband’s agent.
- Before the purchase, John D. Buckstaff, Jr. had notified a local credit bureau that he would not be responsible for credit extended to his wife.
- The sofa was delivered to the Buckstaff residence and remained part of the household furnishings; no payments were made by either spouse.
- Sharpe Furniture, Inc. sued both spouses for the purchase price and interest.
- The circuit court entered judgment against both spouses, holding Karen liable on the contract and John liable under the common-law doctrine of necessaries; the court of appeals affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether a husband may be held liable under Wisconsin’s common-law doctrine of necessaries for a necessary household item purchased on credit by his wife when he did not contract for the item.
2. Whether the creditor must prove the husband neglected or refused to provide the necessary before liability may be imposed under the necessaries doctrine.
3. Whether a high-end household sofa could qualify as a “necessary” given the spouses’ social and economic status and the item’s use in the home.
4. Whether the husband’s prior notice disclaiming responsibility for his wife’s credit defeats liability under the necessaries doctrine.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Wisconsin affirmed the judgment holding both spouses liable.
- The court held the husband could be liable for necessaries furnished to the wife and used by the family even though he was not a party to the purchase contract.
- The court held the creditor was not required to prove the husband neglected or refused to provide the item.
- The court agreed the sofa qualified as a “necessary” under the parties’ circumstances and its continued use in the home.
- The court held the husband’s unilateral credit-disclaimer notice did not eliminate the quasi-contractual duty imposed by the necessaries doctrine.

## Legal Principles

- Under Wisconsin common law, a spouse’s duty to pay for “necessaries” furnished to the family may arise as a quasi-contractual obligation implied in law from the marital relationship, not from express contractual assent.
- A creditor seeking recovery under the doctrine of necessaries need not prove the husband refused or failed to provide the item; the relevant inquiry is whether the goods were reasonably needed for the family and were furnished and retained for family use.
- Whether an item is a “necessary” is a relative determination dependent on the family’s circumstances, including social and economic status and the item’s role as household support.
- A private attempt to disclaim responsibility for a spouse’s credit does not defeat liability when the necessaries doctrine otherwise applies and the family receives and uses the goods.

## Conclusion

The court upheld joint liability for the unpaid sofa debt by enforcing Wisconsin’s common-law doctrine of necessaries, treating the husband’s obligation as an implied-in-law duty triggered by the family’s receipt and use of reasonably needed household goods, without requiring proof that he had neglected or refused to provide them.


Sharpe Furniture, Inc. v. Buckstaff, 99 Wis. 2d 114, 299 N.W.2d 219 (Wis. 1980)