Hospital v. Chisholm, 342 N.C. 616, 621, 467 S.E.2d 88, 90-91 (1996) (recognizing the modernization of the “Doctrine of Necessaries” “to impose liability on a gender-neutral basis”). To establish a prima facie case “for the recovery of expenses incurred in providing necessary medical services to the other spouse,” the party seeking to apply the doctrine must show: (1) medical services were provided to the spouse; (2) the medical services were necessary for the health and well-being of the receiving spouse; (3) the person against whom the action is brought was married to the person to whom the medical services were provided at the time such services were provided; and (4) the payment for the necessaries has not been made. Baptist Hospitals, 319 N.C. at 353-54, 354 S.E.2d at 474-75 (<HOLDING>). In Baptist Hospitals and Forsyth Memorial,
holding that property held by husband and wife in tenancy by entirety is exempt from attachment or execution for the sole debts of husband holding a wife liable for necessary medical expenses incurred by her husband under the doctrine even though the wife did not sign as a guarantor and did not request that her husband be admitted nor anticipate that her husband would be admitted holding that a wife could be liable for inviting a coworker to a remote cabin where he was attacked by her husband holding wife abandoned her attempts to seek sanctions against husband and husband was not placed on notice that those issues would be raised again by guardian ad litem holding that plaintiffs motion to amend her complaint to add her husband as a defendant did not relate back because her failure to sue her husband was not due to misnomer or mistake involving the identity of the proper party but because the law at the time of the complaint did not allow one spouse to sue another in tort