Legal Opinion

State v. Abrisch

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 7, 1889PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Washington county, McCluer, J., presiding, overruling his demurrer to an indictment.

1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.

The specific charge in the indictment is that the •defendant, at a time and place specified, “wilfully and feloniously, under promise of marriage to Tillie Otto, her, the said Tillie Otto, •did then and there seduce and have sexual intercourse with, — said Tillie Otto being then and there an unmarried female of previous ■chaste character, — contrary to the form of the statute,” etc. Section 242 of the Penal Code enacts that “a person who, under promise of marriage, seduces and has sexual intercourse with an unmarried female of previous chaste character, is punishable,” etc. The language of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. ComfortSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. HowardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
  2. State v. OmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
  3. State v. EichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
  4. State v. RosenfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
  5. State v. AbrischSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API