Benge v. Hiatt's Adm'r
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 104 — CONTRACT. ILLEGITIMACY APPEAL PROM GARRARD CIRCUIT COURT. 1. Hiatt’s promise was based upon a legal and valid consideration. (General Statutes, 162; Schauber’s Dom. Rel., 384; 5 Dana, 45; Oro. Bliz,, 67; Selwyn on Measure Damages, 223; Parson’s Cont., book 2, page • 369.) 2. The contract is not within the statute of “Frauds and Perjuries.”
Read the full summary
Case 104 — CONTRACT. ILLEGITIMACY APPEAL PROM GARRARD CIRCUIT COURT. 1. Hiatt’s promise was based upon a legal and valid consideration. (General Statutes, 162; Schauber’s Dom. Rel., 384; 5 Dana, 45; Oro. Bliz,, 67; Selwyn on Measure Damages, 223; Parson’s Cont., book 2, page • 369.) 2. The contract is not within the statute of “Frauds and Perjuries.” (4 Dana, 37; 9 lb., 69; 8 B. Mon., 423; Ohitty on Cont., 68; 19 Mass., ■ 868; 21 Wis., 415; 4 Md., 476.) 3. The promise to pay the ?1,000 is not within the statute of “ Frauds.”' (26 Ala., 272; 31 Miss., 426; Sedgwick on Dam., 199; Ky. Law.…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE PRYOR
delivered the opinion op the court.
The infant appellant, Joseph Benge, instituted this action by his next friend and guardian, against Samuel Hiatt’s administrator, in the Garrard circuit court, asking a judgment for the sum of $6,700 against the estate of the intestate, by reason of a contract alleged to have been made by the mother of the infant with the intestate for the infant’s benefit. The case went. *668off on demurrer, and the only question presented is •as to the sufficiency of the petition.
It is alleged that the mother being an unmarried woman, and the infant the natural son…
2Cited by27 opinions
- Doty's Adm'r v. Doty's GuardianCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1904
- Pair v. PairSupreme Court of Georgia · 1918
- Adams v. Union Railroad Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1899
- Broughton v. BroughtonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1924
- Bowling v. Bowling's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1927
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.