Case Name: KERR v. KERR
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1909-10-08
Citations: 118 N.Y.S. 801
Docket Number: 
Parties: KERR v. KERR.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 118
Pages: 801–802

Head Matter:
KERR v. KERR.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
October 8, 1909.)
Divorce (§ 129 )—Adultery— Sufficiency of Evidence.
Evidence that defendant took a woman to a hotel in the afternoon, registered as man and wife, went with her to a bedroom, and stayed until at least after midnight, was sufficient to show adultery; seeking such privacy being evidence of inclination.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Divorce, Cent. Dig. § 434; Dec. Dig. § 129. ]
Jenks, J., dissenting.
Appeal from Special Term, Kings County.
Action by Louise M. Kerr against George F. Kerr. From an interlocutory judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before HIRSCHBERG, P. J., and JENKS, GAYNOR, RICH, and MILLER, JJ.
Benjamin Reass, for appellant.
Henry Bonawitz, for respondent.
For other eases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
GAYNOR, J.
The evidence is that the defendant went to the Grand Central Station with his hand-bag, met a woman not his wife as she came in on a train at about 3:30 p. m., took her with her hand-baggage to a hotel in a cab, registered her with himself as his wife by his own handwriting, under the name "George Knight and wife, New Haven," had a room assigned to them upstairs in the hotel, and immediately went with her into the lift and up as if to the room, taking their baggage with them. A witness waited in the hotel until midnight to see if he came down, but did not see him. There is no description of the woman, nor of their demeanor toward each other; the attorney for the plaintiff who tried the case seeméd to have no notion of the requirements as to evidence in such cases. Though opportunity was shown, inclination, it is said, was not. But seeking such bedroom privacy was evidence of inclination, stronger than any ordinary act of affection between them at the station or in the cab. What did they register in a hotel as man and wife and retire to a bedroom for? .We have it of old that "it is presumed he saith not a pater noster" there. Burton's Anat. of Mel. vol. 2, pt. 3, § 3, mem. 1, subd. 2.
The judgment should be affirmed.
Interlocutory judgment affirmed, with costs.
HIRSCHBERG, P. J., and RICH and MILLER, JJ., concur in result.