The actionable conduct underlying breach of promise to marry claims is the act of breaking the promise to marry; it does not include the conduct that leads to the breakup.

T] he issues were:(1) Did the defendant make the promise to marry...?(2) Did the defendant break that promise?(3) If so, was the plaintiff damaged

Should this be relied on hereafter as an answer to the statute, it will 1 See 1 Williston, Contracts, Sec. 485 and cases cited. See also acc.

—but, on the other hand, arbitrarily exempt from the operation of the Statute28 mutual promises, or engagements, to marry and antenuptial contracts in contemplation of marriage, as distinguished from consideration of marriage

The fact that the contract in regard to marriage is excluded from the marriage clause of the Statute would not, by reason of its subject matter, be excluded from operation of the Statute of Frauds as an agreement not to be performed within the year

Thus, if A orally promises to marry B, and no time is set for the marriage, the case is not within the Statute

Marble, The cases are in conflict as to whether mere bad reputation for chastity on the part of the plaintiff is a defense.

"It would be imputing to the legislature too great an absurdity to suppose that they had enacted that all our courtships, to be valid, must be in writing."

The defendant further alleged, and there was evi-4 "There is much authority for saying that the defendant had the right to show, if he could do so, that the plaintiff's reputation for chastity was bad before the making of his promise [citing cases]."-

There was abundant evidence here to carry the question of contributory wantonness and recklessness to the jury.

[CITATION] Modern business law and the regulatory environment

[CITATION] The law of domestic relations in the United States

[CITATION] Modern business law

[CITATION] Family law: Cases and materials

[PDF] The One-Year Clause of the Statute of Frauds in South Carolina