Sanders v. Coleman

• Decision Date: 07 December 1899
• Citation: 34 S.E. 621,97 Va. 690
• Parties: SANDERS. v. COLEMAN.
• Court: Virginia Supreme Court

34 S.E. 621

97 Va. 690

SANDERS.

v.COLEMAN.

Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia.

Dec. 7, 1899.

BREACH OF MARRIAGE PROMISE—INCAPACITY —ILLNESS—DEFENSE.

When, after defendant had promised to marry plaintiff, but, before the day named for the consummation of the marriage, without his fault, he contracted a urinary disease which kept him constantly under the treatment of physicians, and which would be aggravated by sexual intercourse, and probably shorten his life, such malady was a complete defense to plaintiff's action for breach of promise.

Error to circuit court, Lancaster county.

Action by Gertrude Coleman against R. M. Sanders. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant brings error. Reversed.

C. Harding Walker and J. W. Chinn, Jr., for plaintiff in error.

Downing & Smith and A. B. Chandler, for defendant in error.

HARRISON, J. This is an action brought by the plaintiff to recover damages for an alleged breach by the defendant of his promise to marry her on the 27th day of April, 1898.

The declaration states with sufficient clearness and particularity the cause of action, and the demurrer was therefore properly overruled.

It appears that in December, 1897, the defendant, a man 52 years of age, received from the plaintiff, who was then 20 years old, a Christmas card. The defendant had met the plaintiff 3 years before, which was the first and only time he had seen her, though he had in the meantime sent her messages through mutual friends. A correspondence between the parties followed the receipt of the card, which resulted in a visit by the defendant to the plaintiff, in Princess Anne county, where she was teaching school, on the 19th of January, 1898. On this visit the defendant addressed the plaintiff, and in a few days was accepted, and the 27th day of April, 1898, fixed for the marriage.

The defendant filed a special plea in which he admits the engagement, and that the 27th of April, 1898, was agreed upon as the time for its consummation. The plea then denies that the defendant had broken his promise to marry the plaintiff, and avers that after making the promise, and before the time for its fulfillment, the defendant had, by the act of God, and without his own fault, become and was sick of a bodily disease which rendered him unfit to marry on the day agreed upon, and that, on the advice of his physician, he, in good faith, wrote to the plaintiff, and asked for a postponement, to which she agreed; that afterwards, on the 27th day of April, 1898, he being still sick of his disease, and doubtful if he should ever recover from the same, wrote a letter to the plaintiff, informing her of his continued sickness, and of his belief that he would be doing her an injustice to marry her in his condition of health, and requesting the plaintiff for that reason to release him from his engagement.

It appears that about the middle of March, 1898, the defendant became afflicted with some trouble about the urinary organs, causing much uneasiness and suffering, and for which he was being treated by a physician, who, however, knew nothing of defendant's contemplated marriage. On the 4th day of April. 1898, the defendant took a drive with his friend and neighbor, Dr. Hubbard, into the country. On this occasion he was suffer-ing very much, and described his symptoms fully to Dr. Hubbard, and told him that he expected to be married on the 27th of the month. The doctor told him that he was not in a condition to get married; that he was suffering from one of three diseases, either of which would be aggravated or made worse by marriage; that, if he married in his then condition of health, it might lead to serious results. The defendant then asked what could he do; that the preparations for his marriage were made. The doctor replied: "I will advise you to do what I would do myself under like circumstances: I would ask for a postponement until you can see the result of your symptoms." The doctor urged upon the defendant the importance to himself and the plaintiff of not marrying at the time then agreed upon. In consequence of this advice the defendant on the same day wrote the plaintiff the following letter:

"Whitestone, Va., April 4, 1898. Dear Miss Gertrude: I deeply regret that circumstances over which I have no control will prevent me from keeping my engagement on the 27th of this month. Trusting you will pardon me, I remain, yours, &c, R. M. Sanders."

Upon the receipt of this letter the plaintiff demanded an explanation, in response to which the defendant wrote as follows:

"Miami, Va., April 7, 1898. Dear Miss Gertrude: Your letter received to-day, and I hasten to reply. The only explanation I can give you is this: I am not in a condition at this time to get married, and my physician advised me to put it off a while...