Egan v. Murray
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Lyon District Court. — How. Gr. W. Wakefield, Judge. The plaintiff averred in her petition that on or about July 3, 1888, the defendant, by means of flattery,false promises, deceits and devices, seduced and debauched her, she being an unmarried woman of previously chaste character. The answer of the defendant was a general denial. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff for fifteen hundred dollars, and defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtRotiirock, C. J.
i. seduction: evidence. *182„ „ tiontoo late, *181— I. -The plaintiff testified, as a witness in her own behalf, that the defendánt had sexual intercourse with her about June 1888, and that as the result of said intercourse she was delivered of a child in the month of *182December of the same year.. In the course of her examination in chief, and cross-examination, she stated, in a general way, that the act of intercourse occurred when the parties were out riding in á buggy. She states that the defendant used physical force to accomplish his purpose, and that she resisted him all she could, but that…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. CurranSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
- Smith v. MilburnSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Brown v. KingsleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1874
- Delvee v. BoardmanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
- Hopkins v. MathiasSupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
3Cited by10 opinions
- Morgan v. MuenchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- State v. FarringtonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1894
- State v. WickettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1941
- McGilvra v. Minneapolis, St. Paul, & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1916
- Breiner v. NugentSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.