Cowden v. Wright
Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
I think the court erred. The foundation of the action is the loss of service, and the *expense [ *430 ] and trouble the parent is subjected to in taking care of his child.
It is true, that in the action for the seduction of a daughter, the jury in fixing upon the damages may regard the wounded feelings of the family; but that case has always been considered sui generis, and inconsistent with the fundamental principle of the action. Besides, there is a marked distinc
Edmondson v. Machell. 2 T. R. 4, may, I think, be regarded as countenancing the view we have taken. Trespass for assaulting and beating the plaintiff’s niece, per quod, &c. was brought by the ajint, and at the same time another action was brought by the niece for the same assault. The counsel for the aunt, on the trial, withdrew the record in the latter case, and declared their intention not to try it. The defendant insisted that the jury could only give damages for the loss of service ; the court ruled otherwise, and placed the case on a footing with the action for seduction. On a motion for a new trial, it was admitted the damages were not excessive, if the jury had a right to take both actions into their consideration ; and the court, on the niece stipulating not to proceed in her action, refused to [ *431 ] . grant a new trial. But it is obvious, from the report *of the case, the result would have been different without this stipulation : in effect, I think, denying the analogy to the suit for seduction.
Judgment reversed ; venire de novo ; costs to abide event.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.