Case ID: wright_1/html/0168-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WRIGHT, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

RICHARDS v. JACOB AND LEWIS FRIDLEY.
    Seduction — fraud—promise of marriage — destruction of notes — chancery jurisdiction.
    It is a gross and iniquitous fraud for a man to pay attention to a female, as if soliciting her hand in m image, and under such pretence, and by a promise to marry, to induce her to destroy a note she held against him.
    A demurrer to a bill stating such a case, and praying general relief will not be-allowed, but the defendant will be put to answer.
    In Chancery. The bill presents this case: That Jacob Fridley having seduced the complainant, and begotten a child upon her;, settled with her for the damages, and gave his notes, with Lewis Fridley his security, for two hundred dollars, the amount agreed upon. After this settlement, he, with the fraudulent design to procure the notes to be given up, courted her again, as if sincerely soliciting her hand in marriage, and under the promise of marriage,, if she would destroy the notes, induced her to destroy them, when-only eighteen dollars had been paid upon them. , Having thus accomplished the destruction of the notes, he abandoned the dupe of his villany. The prayer of the bill is for general relief. The respondent demurred.
    
      Dane and Doane for the demurrants.
    
      Thrall and Olds contra.
   WRIGHT, J.

It is not easy to conceive a more gross and iniquitous fraud, than that this demurrer admits to have been practised by Jacob Fridley. We might, in someway, aid the object of this fraud, if we sustained the demurrer. The question of relief can be raised again after answer. We suggest the withdrawal of the demurrer, and that the complainant have leave to amend her bill, and the defendant to answer.

This was done.