1964) (contrasting the woman who "knows full well that she is entering into an immoral and meretricious relationship" in a standard breach-of-promise case with "the good faith supposed change of status on the part of the woman deceived"); Snyder v.
Susie Steinbach, in her study of English breach-of-promise cases, has found that juries routinely took such preparations into account:
But see GROSSBERG, supra note 10, at 56-58 (noting that the unusual evidentiary rules for breach-of-promise suits had been largely made to conform with other actions in the late 19th century, well before the legislative reforms).
10) Early breach-of-promise cases were mainly about responding to the financial harms of a broken engagement, but the action was reconceptualized over time as one centering around emotional wounds.
Lawsuits brought after the reform period still concerned broken engagements, but most of these cases differed in several important respects from paradigmatic breach-of-promise cases.