Wagenseller v. Simmers
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Chester county: Of January Term 1881, No. 187. This was an action on the case for breach of promise of marriage. The narr. averred that in consideration that the plaintiff had promised to marry the defendant, the defendant had promised to marry the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff had refused to comply with his promise within a reasonable time, although requested so to do by the defendant, who was ready and willing, &c.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Chester county: Of January Term 1881, No. 187. This was an action on the case for breach of promise of marriage. The narr. averred that in consideration that the plaintiff had promised to marry the defendant, the defendant had promised to marry the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff had refused to comply with his promise within a reasonable time, although requested so to do by the defendant, who was ready and willing, &c. Plea, not guilty. Upon the trial, before Futhey, P. J., the defendant presented, inter alia, the following points :— 5. That to support…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Mercur
Three grounds of defence are taken by the plaintiff in error: First. He never promised to marry ; second, he did not refuse to marry; and third, that she released him from his promise to marry. These different defences may have appeared rather inconsistent to the minds of the jurors. As he appears to have urged each with equal persistency, if they were clearly satisfied that ho did promise, they may have given less weight than they otherwise would have done to his evidence bearing on the other points. If so, he has no just cause of complaint at a result produced by his own evidence.
1. The…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Barton v. SaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923