Case ID: nys_54/html/1074-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(34 App. Div. 25.)
    KIRBY v. KIRBY.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
    October 18, 1898.)
    Alienation of Husband’s Affection—Bill of Particulars.
    Defendant in an action for the alienation of a husband’s affection is not entitled to a bill of particulars to the complaint, which alleged only a continued depreciation by defendant to the husband of the plaintiff as a wife.
    Appeal from special term, Dutchess county.
    Action by Sarah A. M. Kirby against Charles H. Kirby for the alienation of her husband’s affection. From an order denying defendant’s motion for a bill of particulars, he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    The following is the opinion of the court below (BARNARD, J.):
    A bill of particulars would be a difficult matter to frame in an action such as this. A wife charges her husband’s uncle with alienating her husband’s affection and breaking up her home. There is no impropriety alleged other than a continued depreciation of the plaintiff as a wife. Such a complaint must be- made out by proof, presumably, of many instances, and probably on many occasions,—here a little and there a little. The general allegation is made: “You depreciated me to my husband, and destroyed my happiness." Such, a- general charge can be easily met. Motion denied, with $10 costs to abide- the event.
    Argued before GOODRICH, P. J., and CULLEN, BARTLETT, HATCH, and WOODWARD, JJ.
    Charles F. Cossum, for appellant. •
    Frank B. Lown, for respondent. 0
    
   PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, opinion oft BARNARD, J., at special term.