Hunter v. Hatfield

<p>Promise of Markiase. — Complaint for Breach.■ — Request of Performance. —In an action for a breach of a mutual promise to marry, wherein the complaint avers the marriage of the defendant to another, it is not necessary to aver that the plaintiff had made a demand upon the defendant to fulfil his promise.</p> <p>Same. — Readiness to Perform. — Supreme Court. — Pleading.—Practice.—A complaint for a breach of a mutual promise to marry is good after verdict, against an assignment of error raising for the first time, in the Supreme Court, the question that it does not aver the continued readiness and willingness of the plaintiff to marry the defendant, from the time the contract was made until its alleged breach.</p> <p>Same. — Immorality of Plaintiff. — Evidence.—In support of an answer to a complaint for a breach of promise to marry, which alleged that the plaintiff is an unchaste and immoral woman, who had frequented assignation houses and practised prostitution, evidence of the fact that the plaintiff' had lived with a certain woman, at a certain place, and at a time when said woman kept a house of assignation and prostitution, is competent.</p> <p>Same. — Defences.—Instruction.—Damages.—Under the code, the defendant may set forth, without prejudice, as many grounds of defence as he may choose ; and, upon the trial of an action for a breach of promise to marry, it is error to instruct the jury' that, although the defendant has the right to place on file an answer affecting the character of the plaintiff for chastity and morality, he does so at his peril; and that, if the jury find the answer to be untrue, it is their duty to consider the charges so madeagainst the plaintiff, so far as they affect her character, in aggravation of damages, and that they may assess exemplary damages for the wrong done plaintiff in placing upon record such charges against her character.</p> <p>Same. — Pecuniary Condition of Defendant. — The plaintiff, in an action for a breach of a promise of marriage, may show, by evidence, the pecuniary condition of the defendant, at the time of the alleged breach, to enhance the amount of damages.</p> <p>Supreme (Jqurt.— Can not Presume Against Record. — Practice.—The Supreme Court can not presume against 'he record. Every thing in it which is not shown to be wrong must be presumed to be right; and, when the record does not show that an objection to certain rejected evidence was not properly taken, the question of the rejection of such evidence is well presented</p> <p>Same. — Appellant can not Suffer for Neglect of Appellee. — The appellant can not suffer for the neglect of the appellee and the latter cannot be heard to say, in the Supreme Court, that his objection, upon which evidence offered by the appellant was excluded, was not properly taken.</p> <p>Same. — New Trial, Motion for. — Bill of Exceptions. — The motion for a new trial, and the causes assigned therefor, become a part of the-record without a bill of exceptions; though they may also be made a part of the record by a bill of exceptions ; but it is not necessary that they should be presented by both methods, as either i's sufficient.</p>