McKenzie v. Lombard

27 A. 110, 85 Me. 224, 1892 Me. LEXIS 47
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedDecember 26, 1892
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 27 A. 110 (McKenzie v. Lombard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
McKenzie v. Lombard, 27 A. 110, 85 Me. 224, 1892 Me. LEXIS 47 (Me. 1892).

Opinion

Peters, C. J.

The question here is whether a bastardy proceeding survives against the personal representatives of a respondent who has died during the pendency of the proceeding in court before a trial has been had. We feel strongly assured that it cannot survive. The proposition finds no favor in the common law, and there is no statutory provision authorizing it. The legislature (R. S., c. 79, § 11) in 1879 passed an act allowing a proceeding of the kind to be prosecuted to final judgment by the executors or administrators of a complainant who has deceased before trial of the prosecution. Beyond this exceptional limit no statute or decision that we are aware of has ever gone. No judgment is sought for or is obtainable against property. The process, though held to be a civil proceeding, is criminal in form, and is an extraordinary means to compel a father to assist in the support of his illegitimate child or suffer imprisonment as a penalty for his neglect to do so. There is no fitness in the proceeding that would adapt itself to the principle of survivorship.

If the pending action survives then the cause of action would survive as well, and the process could be originally instituted against the administrator of a deceased person who in his lifetime had been guilty under the bastardy statute. The incon[225]*225gruities that would beset such a. proceeding are obvious enough. It would be a strange sight to see an administrator arrested, required to give a bond, be put on trial, and perhaps imprisoned, for an act of bastardy committed by the party officially represented by him. Besides, it would be an extremely severe and very questionable policy that would allow a living woman to swear the paternity of her illegitimate offspring upon a dead man.

Exceptions overruled.

Virgin, Libbey, Emery, Foster and Whitehouse, JJ., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Child Support Enforcement Agency v. Doe
53 P.3d 277 (Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals, 2002)
Hayes v. Smith
480 A.2d 425 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1984)
Gross v. VanLerberg
646 P.2d 471 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1981)
N. R. v. R. J. D.
588 S.W.2d 76 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1979)
Nr v. Rjd
588 S.W.2d 76 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1979)
Carpenter v. Sylvester
267 So. 2d 370 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1972)
Schumm v. Beery
224 P.2d 54 (California Court of Appeal, 1950)
Pryor v. Jump
1938 OK 548 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1938)
People v. Rogas
161 Misc. 32 (New York County Courts, 1936)
Woodbury v. Wilson
177 A. 708 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1935)
Myers v. Harrington
234 P. 412 (California Court of Appeal, 1925)
Commonwealth v. Moran
58 Pa. Super. 362 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1914)
People v. Kemppainen
128 N.W. 183 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1910)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
27 A. 110, 85 Me. 224, 1892 Me. LEXIS 47, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckenzie-v-lombard-me-1892.