Opinion
(Filed 8 January, 1932.)
Husband and Wife A c — Misrepresentation of wife before marriage that she was pregnant is no defense in prosecution for wilful abandonment.
The false representations of the prosecutrix that she was pregnant before the marriage is no defense in a criminal action against the husband for willful abandonment.
APPEAL by defendant from McElroy, J., at May Term, 1931, of BUNCOMBE. No error.
Attorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Seawell for the State.
Thomas A. Curry for defendant.
The defendant was indicted for wilful abandonment of his wife. On appeal the chief contention was that the defendant's consent to the marriage was procured by the false representation of the prosecutrix before the marriage that she was pregnant. It has been held that this is not a sufficient cause for the annulment of the marriage ( Bryant v. Bryant, 171 N.C. 746), and if not, it is obviously not a sufficient cause for collaterally assailing the validity of the marriage in a distinct proceeding. We have examined all the exceptions and find no error.
No error.