Rockwell v. Day

Citations

• 101 Wash. 580
• 172 P. 754
• 1918 Wash. LEXIS 872

Syllabus

<p>Seduction—Pkomise of Mabbiage—Necessity. Where seduction is alleged under promise of marriage, or the promise is required by-statute, it must be shown that the necessary promise existed at the time of the seduction.</p> <p>Same—Pkomise of Mabbiage—Evidence—Sufficiency. A promise to “take care” of a woman of mature years who has voluntarily submitted herself to sexual intercourse, and who has been married and knows what it means to be “taken care of” after illicit cohabitation, is not a sufficient promise of marriage to sustain an action for seduction, especially where there was no impediment to marriage, the parties lived together openly and consent was- not obtained by promises which made the struggle unequal when measured by age, experience, and other attending circumstances.</p> <p>Seduction—Civil Action — Accbual—Limitations — Continuing Relations—Abandonment. A right of action for seduction under promise of marriage accrues at the time the promise is made; and granting that it would continue until the illicit relations are broken off and three years thereafter, such relations must be continuous, and if abandoned and returned to under no new promise, the statute began to run at that time, and the action must be brought within three years after such an abandonment.</p>