Case ID: ohio-law-abs_20/html/0288-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By HAMILTON, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HOFFER v WHITE
    Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist, Warren, Co
    No 181.
    Decided Oct 18, 1935
    Arthur Bryant, Franklin, and Wm. E. Hoffer, Franklin, for plaintiff in error.
    Young & Young, Lebanon, for defendant in error.
   OPINION

By HAMILTON, J.

In the case of State ex Beebe v Cowley, 116 Oh St, 377, the Supreme Court of Ohio states in the opinion:

“A reputed father of a bastard child is not legally and financially responsible for its maintenance unless there is a statute imposing such a duty upon him.”.

This pronouncement disposes of any right to maintain such an action under the common law.

We know of no statute and none has been cited giving a right to a creditor to maintain a civil action against the reputed father for necessaries furnished the bastard child. Prior to the amendment to §13133, GC, the father of a bastard child stood charged with its 'maintenance, but the amendment passed in 1934, and as it now stands that provision has been eliminated. As the statute now stands, relief is furnished only to the mother of the bastard child for her support, maintenance, and necessary expenses.

The criminal statute for non-support is not before us.

The trial court did not commit error in sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the petition.

Judgment affirmed.

ROSS, PJ, and MATTHEWS, J, concur.