Birdsall v. Edgerton
New York Supreme Court
Error from the Delaware common pleas. Edgerton and two others, superintendents of the poor of the county of Delaware brought an action of assumpsit in a justice’s court against Birdsall for the support and maintenance of a bastard child, of which they alleged he was the putative father.
Read the full summary
Error from the Delaware common pleas. Edgerton and two others, superintendents of the poor of the county of Delaware brought an action of assumpsit in a justice’s court against Birdsall for the support and maintenance of a bastard child, of which they alleged he was the putative father. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and on the trial of the cause it was proved that the child, being the son of Sally Palmer, had been maintained in the county poor-house at the expense of the county for a period of about five months; that in March, 1838, the defendant was called upon by the supervisor…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Nelson, C. J.
It was held in Moncrief v. Ely, 19 Wendell, 406, that the putative father was not legally liable, at com- [ *620 ] mon law, for the support of his bastard *cbild ; and as the liability was created wholly by statute, the remedy there prescribed must be pursued. But it was admitted that on the ground of the natural or moral obligation arising out of the relation of the parties, he may be chargeable upon an express promise; or if he had adopted the child as his own, a promise might be implied in favor of the party maintaining it.
There is no pretence in this case that the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Wallerstein v. . the Columbian Insurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1870