Paul v. Frazier

3 Mass. 71
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedJuly 15, 1807
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 3 Mass. 71 (Paul v. Frazier) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Paul v. Frazier, 3 Mass. 71 (Mass. 1807).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was, some days after, delivered by

Parsons, C. J.

This is an action of the case to recover damages against the defendant for seducing the plaintiff under a false pretence of courtship and intention of marriage, and for getting her with child, whereby her reputation has suffered, and her peace of mind been injured. After a verdict for the plaintiff on the issue of not guilty, the defendant moves to arrest the judgment. And we are of opinion that judgment must be arrested. An action of this nature is not given by statute; and there is no principle of the common law on which it can be sustained. Fornication and adultery are offences [63]*63in this commonwealth created by statute. And the declaration amounts to a charge against the defendant for deceiving the plaintiff, and persuading her to commit a crime, in consequence of which she has suffered damage. She is a partaker of the crime, and cannot, come into Court to obtain satisfaction for a supposed injury to which she was consenting.

It has been regretted at the bar that the law has not provided a remedy for an unfortunate female against her seducer. Those who are competent to legislate on this subject will consider, before they provide this remedy, whether seductions will afterwards be less frequent, or whether artful women may not pretend to be seduced, in order to obtain a pecuniary compensation. As the law now stands, damages are recoverable for a breach of promise of marriage ; and if seduction has been practised under color of that promise, the jury will undoubtedly consider it as an aggravation of the damages. So far the law has provided; and we do not profess to be wiser than the law.

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

Related

Breece v. Jett
556 S.W.2d 696 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1977)
Thibault v. Lalumiere
60 N.E.2d 349 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1945)
Hyatt v. . McCoy
138 S.E. 405 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1927)
Wrynn v. Downey
63 A. 401 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1906)
Graham v. Wallace
50 A.D. 101 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)
Ingwaldson v. Skrivseth
75 N.W. 772 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1898)
Conlon v. Cassidy
23 A. 100 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1891)
Tyler v. Salley
19 A. 107 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1889)
Weiher v. Meyersham
16 N.W. 160 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1883)
Jordan v. Hovey
72 Mo. 574 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1880)
Cates v. McKinney
48 Ind. 562 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1874)
Sauer v. Schulenberg
33 Md. 288 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1870)
Sherman v. Rawson
102 Mass. 395 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1869)
Hovey v. Page
55 Me. 142 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1867)
Fidler v. McKinley
21 Ill. 308 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1859)
Coil v. Wallace
24 N.J.L. 291 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1854)
Dennis v. Clark
56 Mass. 347 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1848)
Green v. Spencer
3 Mo. 318 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1834)
James Conn v. Eliza Wilson
2 Tenn. 233 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1814)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 Mass. 71, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paul-v-frazier-mass-1807.