Lee v. Cooley
Oregon Supreme Court
Lane County. Defendant appeals. Action for the seduction of the plaintiff’s daughter. The defendant demurred to the complaint as not stating that the daughter alleged to have been seduced was at the time under the age of twenty-one years. The allegation was, “ that the said Elsie Lee was of the age of sixteen years.” The demurrer was overruled.
Read the full summary
Lane County. Defendant appeals. Action for the seduction of the plaintiff’s daughter. The defendant demurred to the complaint as not stating that the daughter alleged to have been seduced was at the time under the age of twenty-one years. The allegation was, “ that the said Elsie Lee was of the age of sixteen years.” The demurrer was overruled. At the trial, the plaintiff offered and the court admitted in evidence, a letter written by the daughter after the alleged seduction and before the commencement of the suit, in which she accused the defendant of getting her into trouble, and calling…
1Opinion of the CourtWaldo, C. J.
The objection that the complaint did not state a cause of action is made unavailing by the decision in Parker v. Monteith, 7 Or. 277.
The letter, and the defendant’s reply thereto, stand on the footing of conversations between the parties. The letter spoke the language of the daughter as if she was personally present. The defendant was called upon to reply. “ What is said to a man before his face he is in some degree called on to contradict, if he does not acquiesce in it.” (Fairlie v. Denton, 3 Car. & P. 103.) In Boyden v. Burke, 14 How. 581, a letter from plaintiff to defendant was adjudged…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Learned v. . TillotsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Parker v. MonteithOregon Supreme Court · 1879
3Cited by4 opinions
- Johnson v. UnderwoodOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- Snead v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1924
- Frame v. Oregon Liquor Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1906
- Snead v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1924