Burton v. Belvin

• Decision Date: 25 September 1906
• Citation: 142 N.C. 161,55 S.E. 71
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: BURTON . v. BELVIN.

55 S.E. 71

142 N.C. 161

BURTON .

v.BELVIN.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Sept. 25, 1906.

1. Bastards—-Support—Contracts—Actions for Breach—Complaint.

A complaint, alleging that • defendant seduced plaintiff and begot children with her; that during the cohabitation he promised that, if she would not institute bastardy proceedings against him, he would provide necessaries for herself and children; that his promise was renewed from time to time, and by means of the promises based on their illegal relations, but without stipulation as to future cohabitation, she was induced to refrain from instituting bastardy proceedings; that defendant broke his promises, and removed to another state, and demanding recovery for breach of the promise— states an action for damages for breach of a promise supported by a good consideration, and not a proceeding in bastardy.

2. Same—Consideration.

An agreement by the mother of a bastard not to resort to bastardy proceedings is a good consideration for a pecuniary settlement by the putative father.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 6, Cent. Dig. Bastards, 5 25.]

3. Contracts—Validity — Legality of Object—Past Cohabitation.

A contract, in consideration of past cohabitation to support the woman and children begotten during the cohabitatiou, is not void, though the illegal cohabitation continues, if there is no stipulation for future cohabitation.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 6, Cent. Dig. Bastards, § 25; vol. 11, Cent. Dig. Contracts, § 514.]

Appeal from Superior Court, Vance County; Ward, Judge.

Action by I.ucy Burton against N. J. Belvin. Prom a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

A. G. Zollicoffer and Henry T. Powell, for appellant.

T. T. Hicks and T. M. Pittman, for appellee.

CLARK, C. J. The complaint alleges that the defendant, who is a married man, seduced the plaintiff when she was 14 years of age and has begotten three children by her; that during such cohabitation, in response to her repeated requests for assistance for herself and children, she then being again with child by him and disclosing her purpose to appeal to the bastardy law if refused, the defendant promised that, if she would not institute such proceeding, he would provide her "with money and necessaries for the support of herself and children, begotten by him, and for the expenses of her sickness and lying in, and for her maintenance when she was unable to work. These promises he continued to make and renew from time to time to the plaintiff and to her father for her, and by means of his said promises, all of which were based upon their relations and the results thereof, and without stipulation or reference to any future cohabitation, she was induced to refrain from making application to the court under the provisions of the bastardy law or to bring any action against him." The complaint further alleges that the defendant has broken his oft repeated and solemn promises and removed to Virginia, leaving her, and his children by her, destitute and unprovided for, and asks for the recovery of damages sustained from the breach of the defendant's promises.

The defendant demurred on the grounds:

1. "That this is a proceeding in bastardy, and a justice of the peace has exclusive original jurisdiction." This is not a bastardy proceeding, but it is an action for damages from a breach of a promise made upon good and valid consideration....