Woodham v. Allen

Action fob Money Obtained Under Men ace—Threats of Criminal Prosecution—Pleading—Sufficiency of Complaint.—A complaint setting forth the extortion by defendant from plaintiff of merchandise and secured notes of the total value of four hundred dollars, through fear of threats of a criminal prosecution against the husband of the plaintiff for receiving stolen goods of that value, if not paid, and that the notes were paid by plaintiff under fear of the same threats, and that her said husband was not guilty of said offense, states a cause of action for the recovery of that amount so obtained by means of menace.

Id.—Cause of Action in Tort—Averment of Nonpayment not Required . Such complaint states a cause of action in tort, and not ex contractu; and no averment of nonpayment of the amount so unlawfully extorted by menace is required.

Id.—Compounding of Felony—Stifling of Prosecution Against Innocent Person — Pari Delicto.—The complaint stating that the husband was innocent of the crime charged does not show that any felony was compounded, nor that plaintiff and defendant were parties in pari delieto to an illegal contract. The stifling of a criminal prosecution against an innocent man, by the payment of money, cannot be wrong in an equal degree to the threatened prosecution itself.

Id.—Executed Illegal Contract—Relief of Parties—Equal Fault— Fraud or Oppression.—The doctrine that neither of the parties of an executed illegal contract will be relieved in a court of justice applies only where the parties were equally in fault, and each had freely joined in the transaction, without being induced thereto by the fraud or oppression of the other. Where there is oppression on one side and submission on the other, there can be no equal fault.

Id.—Ratification of Notes by Payment not Shown—Recovery of Payments.—The complaint averring that the notes were paid under fear of the same threats which induced their execution does not show that the payment thereof amounted to a ratification of the notes; but the payments so made under fear of arrest of the plaintiff’s husband can be recovered back.

Id.—Duress—Certainty—Time of Payment of Notes.—The complaint being sufficiently certain in showing both that the execution and the payment of the notes were secured by duress, it is not demurrable for uncertainty in not stating when the notes were made payable or when they were paid,