Case ID: nys_25/html/0753-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "EHRLICH, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(5 Misc. Rep. 360.)
    KUJEK v. GOLDMANN.
    (City Court of New York, General Term.
    October 20, 1893.)
    Deceit—Evidence.
    An action will lie against one who induced plaintiff to marry a woman, whom he, defendant, had seduced, by representations that she was virtuous.
    Appeal from trial term.
    Action by Johann August Kujek against Manasseh L. Goldmann. From a judgment entered on a verdict for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before EHRLICH, O. J., and KEWBURGER and MCCARTHY, JJ.
    Max Altmayer, for appellant.
    A. P. Wagener, for respondent.
   EHRLICH, C. J.

The jury, by their verdict, have found that the defendant seduced one Katie Harass, a domestic in Ms employ, whereby she became pregnant with child. That while in this condition he induced the plaintiff to marry the said Katie, on Ms representation that she was a good, virtuous girl; the plaintiff believing and relying on the representation, and knowing notiMng to the contrary. The defendant knew that his representation was false, and that he was deceiving the plaintiff, to his injury. Under such circumstances, we are of opinion that, notwithstanding the novelty of the action, it is maintainable, and that such a wrong has its remedy. The verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $2,000 was not excessive, and there 'appears no substantial reason for interfering with it. We find no error in the rulings, and the judgment and order denying the motion for a new trial must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.