Fiege v. Boehm
Court of Appeals of Maryland
123 A.2d 316 (1956)
- Written by Christine Hilgeman, JD
Facts
Hilda Louise Boehm (plaintiff) alleged in her breach of contract action that Louis Gail Fiege (defendant) had impregnated her and agreed to pay expenses and support for her child if she did not bring bastardy proceedings against him. Fiege made payments between 1951 and 1953 and Boehm refrained from bringing bastardy proceedings until Fiege stopped making payments in 1953 upon learning from a paternity blood test that he could not be the child’s father. Although Fiege was acquitted of the bastardy charge, the trial court instructed the jury in Boehm’s breach of contract trial that the acquittal was not binding on them. The jury found in favor of Boehm and Fiege sought reversal of the verdict on the ground that Boehm’s claim was invalid for lack of consideration since Boehm’s claim that he was the father was invalid. The court denied Fiege’s post-verdict motions and entered judgment on the verdict. Fiege appealed that ruling.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Delaplaine, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
