Sanders Ex Rel. Pratt v. Sanders
This text of 83 S.E. 490 (Sanders Ex Rel. Pratt v. Sanders) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This action is brought by tbe two children named in tbe above decree, by tbeir next friend, against tbe same defendant, tbeir father, asking for a decree of maintenance. It is intended to present the question whether tbe father can be decreed to support tbe children. Tbe judge below sustained a demurrer upon tbe ground that there-was no cause of action.
There can be no controversy that tbe father is under a legal as well as a moral duty to support bis infant children (Walker v. Crowder, 37 N. C., 487), and, if be bas tbe ability to do so, whether they have property or not. Hagler v. McCombs, 66 N. C., 345. There is a natural obligation to support even illegitimate children which tbe law not only recognizes, but enforces. Burton v. Belvin, 142 N. C., 153; Kimbrough v. Davis, 16 N. C., 74. Besides, tbe failure to support bis children is a crime. Rev., 3355; S. v. Kerby, 110 N. C., 558.
Tbe liability of tbe father primarily to support tbe children remains as well after, as before a divorce, and even where tbe custody of tbe children bas been awarded to tbe mother. 14 Cyc., 812; 9 A. and E. (2 Ed.), 871. ‘
Tbe relief asked, however, having been granted in tbe proceeding above, this action was improvidently brought.
Action dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
83 S.E. 490, 167 N.C. 319, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sanders-ex-rel-pratt-v-sanders-nc-1914.