ANDERSON v. FRYAnnotate this Case
ANDERSON v. FRY
1955 OK 286
288 P.2d 1111
Case Number: 36526
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
MARGARET Mae ANDERSON, A MINOR, BY HER MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND, BERTHA ANDERSON, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
BERRY FRY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR.
[288 P.2d 1111]
Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County; Eben L. Taylor, Judge.
Action by Margaret Mae Anderson, a minor, by her mother and next friend, Bertha Anderson, against Berry Fry. From an order and judgment sustaining a Demurrer and dismissing the petition, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
William H. McClarin, Tulsa, for plaintiff in error.
Luther P. Lane, Tulsa, for defendant in error.
¶1 An eight year old girl, born out of wedlock, brought this action, through her mother as her next friend, against one alleged to be her father, to require the defendant to make provision for her support. This appeal is from an order sustaining a demurrer to the petition.
¶2 At common law the putative father is under no legal obligation to support his illegitimate child or to provide for its education. This rule has almost universal acceptance in this county. As a consequence, there is not liability of the alleged father unless such liability is imposed by statute. 10 C.J.S., Bastards, § 18 c, p. 86. [288 P.2d 1112] Most states, including Oklahoma, have adopted remedial legislation to lessen the harshness of the common law rule. Title
¶3 Plaintiff in Error relies on the rule first announced by the Supreme Court of Kansas in the case of Doughty v. Engler, 112 Kan. 583, 211 P. 619, 30 A.L.R. 1065. It is her contention that inasmuch as
¶4 As was pointed out by our Criminal Court of Appeals, "These sections (
¶5 Although some allegations were contained in the petition that might suggest an adoption of this child under
¶6 The judgment is affirmed.
¶7 The Court acknowledges the aid of the Supreme Court Commissioners in the preparation of this opinion. After a tentative opinion was written by Commissioner Nease and approved by Commissioners Reed and Crawford, the cause was assigned to a Justice of this Court for examination and report to the Court. Thereafter, upon report and consideration in conference, the foregoing opinion was adopted by the Court.
¶8 JOHNSON, C.J., WILLIAMS, V.C.J., and WELCH, CORN, HALLEY, BLACKBIRD and JACKSON, JJ., concur.