Roper v. Clay
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Wright Circuit Court. 1. The petition does not show that the defendant promised to marry the plaintiff. The promise must be mutual. 6 Bacon’s Ab.
Read the full summary
Error to Wright Circuit Court. 1. The petition does not show that the defendant promised to marry the plaintiff. The promise must be mutual. 6 Bacon’s Ab. (Bouvier’s ed.) 461. 2 Ghitty’s PL 322 & notes. 2. An action for seduction cannot bo maintained in the name of the party seduced, but only in the name of some one standing in the relation of master or parent. 3. The evidence offered to prove that, at the time of the alleged promise by the defendant, the plaintiff was engaged to be married to a third person, should have been admitted. If such was the case, the defendant’s promise was null…
1Opinion of the CourtRylard, Judge
The plaintiff, Roper, filed her petition in the Wright Circuit Court, in March, 1852, against the defendant, Clay. The petition contained three counts, setting forth three causes of-action against the defendant; the first count was for a breach of promise of marriage; the second was for seduction and getting the plaintiff with child ; the third was for mal-practice as a physician, whereby the plaintiff’s health was greatly impaired, &c. The defendant filed his answer denying the matters charged in the plaintiff’s petition. He denied that he ever promised to marry the plaintiff ; denied that…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Breece v. JettMissouri Court of Appeals · 1977
- Munchow v. MunchowMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- Sauer v. SchulenbergCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1870
- Jordan v. HoveySupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- Piggott v. MillerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1977
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.