Crossett v. Brackett
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, for breach of promise of marriage. Trial by jury and verdict for the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s evidence tended to prove a contract to marry, made in 1898, and that shortly thereafter the parties began to live as husband and wife and continued so to live until 1917. The subject of their marriage was frequently discussed, and as to it the plaintiff testified in part as follows: “Q. Did you and he take up relations of man and wife together as soon as you began…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, for breach of promise of marriage. Trial by jury and verdict for the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s evidence tended to prove a contract to marry, made in 1898, and that shortly thereafter the parties began to live as husband and wife and continued so to live until 1917. The subject of their marriage was frequently discussed, and as to it the plaintiff testified in part as follows: “Q. Did you and he take up relations of man and wife together as soon as you began keeping house? A. Yes, sir. Q. And those have continued for how long? A. Ever since. Q. Until when? A. Until last January. Q.…
1Opinion of the CourtPeaslee, J.
In support of the motion for a nonsuit, the defendant claims that there is no evidence of a legal contract to marry existing between the parties at a later date than 1898. He admits that there is evidence of an original legal promise to marry, but claims that it conclusively appears that this promise was shortly thereafter abandoned and a promise based upon an illegal consideration substituted . therefor. But if the evidence is sufficient to support such a finding it is by no means the only conclusion which might reasonably be reached. It could fairly be found that the subsequent negotiations…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Walters v. StockbergerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1898
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dyer v. LalorSupreme Court of Vermont · 1920
- Kerzty v. WardymkaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1929
- Kuehl v. HamiltonOregon Supreme Court · 1931