Lela Waters v. Edward L. Riley.
| Decision Date | 19 October 1920 |
| Docket Number | No. 3887.,3887. |
| Citation | 87 W.Va. 250 |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | Lela Waters v. Edward L. Riley. |
1. Bastards Provisions for Support of Child Not Interfered With, in the Absence of Abuse of Discretion.
In a bastardy proceeding pursuant to the provisions of chapter 80, Code 1918, the amount and frequency of the payments which the putative father, if found guilty, must make for the maintenance and support of the child, the period of time during which they are to continue, and the amount of the bond required to be executed by him to guarantee due performance of the order, are matters largely intrusted by the statute to the sound discretion of the circuit court, to be exercised in the light of all the facts and circumstances of the case, and unless the ruling thereon manifestly appears to be improper, this court cannot disturb it. (p. 253).
2. Same Payments for Support of Child and Bond to Guarantee Performance Held Not Unreasonable or Excessive.
An order of the circuit court in a bastardy proceeding, requiring the putative father to contribute to the maintenance and support of the child the sum of $360 annually, payable in equal monthly installments at the end of each calendar month, for a period of ten years, should the child live that long, and to execute a $2,500 bond with sureties deemed sufficient to guarantee performance of the obligation so imposed, held not unreasonable or excessive, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, (p. 253).
3. Same Criminal Law Bastardy Proceedings Not Subject to Constitutional Provision Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment.
A bastardy proceeding, though criminal in form, is in substance a civil suit, and therefore not subject to the constitutional inhibition against cruel and unusual punishment, (p. 253).
(Williams, President, absent.)
Error to Circuit Court, Monongalia County.
Action by Lela Waters against Edward L. Riley. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
Affirmed.
Glenn Hunter and Ohas. T. Herd, for plaintiff in error.
E. T. England, Attorney General, and Ohas. Ritchie, Assistant Attorney General, for defendant in error.
Arrested and brought before a justice of the peace of Monongalia County upon a warrant issued by him upon the complaint of Lela Waters, an unmarried woman, charging defendant with being the father of a male child born unto her December 27, 1918, Edward Riley, the accused, entered into a recognizance conditioned upon his appearance in the circuit court to answer such charge. He did so appear, but not by any plea contesting the truth of the complaint or warrant or demanding trial by jury, and Lela Waters waiving such trial, the court heard the evidence offered by the parties and adjudged Riley guilty as charged in the complaint and warrant, and by an order entered of record required him to pay annually to the county court of Monongalia County, for the maintenance of the child, the sum of $360, in equal monthly installments payable at the end of each calendar month, for a period of ten years, should the child live that long, and also required him to execute a $2,500 bond with sureties deemed sufficient to secure performance of the obligation so imposed, unless discharged therefrom according to law, and adjudged against him the costs of the proceeding. This bond he gave and thereby escaped the alternative requirement for incarceration in the county jail until he should give the bond.
Reduced to their simplest form, the errors assigned for reversal of the judgment are: (1) The excessiveness of the amount required to be paid, thereby bringing it within the inhibition of the constitutional provision against the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment; (2) The requirement for monthly instead of annual payments, and the period of time during which they are to be paid; (3) The excessiveness of the bond required. The statute authorizing the proceeding is chapter 80, Code 1918.
The accused did not plead and did not demand a jury trial, or object to the mode of procedure, and raised no question as to its regularity or otherwise, except as already noted. He assails the award of the sum named for the maintenance of the child as excessive and therefore within the constitutional inhibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Section 4, ch. 80, Code 1918, provides: "If the accused * * * be found guilty, the court shall order him to pay to the county court for the maintenance of the child such sums as it may deem proper for each year, until such time as the court may appoint, unless it sooner die: and shall order the father to give a bond in such penalty and with such sureties as it may deem sufficient for the performance of said...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Crouser v. Mercer
...ex rel. Cottrill v. Jarvis, 121 W.Va. 496, 5 S.E.2d 115; State ex rel. Pierce v. Williams, 95 W.Va. 218, 120 S.E. 594; Waters v. Riley, 87 W.Va. 250, 104 S.E. 559; Burr v. Phares, 81 W.Va. 160, 94 S.E. 30, L.R.A.1918D, 289; Bowen v. Parsons, 78 W.Va. 791, 90 S.E. 336; Swisher v. Malone, 31 ......
-
State Ex Rel. Carl Rufus v. Easley
...in effect, a civil action. Bratt v. Cornwell, 68 W. Va. 541, 70 S. E. 271; Bowen v. Parsons, 78 W. Va. 791, 90 S. E. 336; Waters v. Riley, 87 W. Va. 250, 104 S. E. 559; State v. Jarvis, 121 W. Va. 496, 5 S. E. 2d 115. It is created by statute, which appears as Article 7 of Chapter 48 of the......
-
State ex rel. Rufus v. Easley
... ... 271; Bowen v. Parsons, 78 ... W.Va. 791, 90 S.E. 336; Waters v. Riley, 87 W.Va ... 250, 104 S.E. 559; State ex rel. Cottrill v ... ...
-
Kathy L.B. v. Patrick J.B.
..."A proceeding in bastardy, though criminal in form, is in substance a civil, not a criminal, action[.]" See also Waters v. Riley, 87 W.Va. 250, 104 S.E. 559 (1920); Bowen v. Parsons, 78 W.Va. 791, 90 S.E. 336 (1916).6 In 1873, the right to sue under the paternity statute was extended to any......