Court Opinion

ID: 5507626
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-10 03:20:45.251818+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:34:05.183714
License: Public Domain

VAN BRUNT, P. J.
It may not be necessary to add anything to the opinion which was handed down upon the decision of the demurrer in the court below; but it may be proper to call attention to the fact that part of the contract, damages for the breach of which this action was brought to recover, was to furnish evidence to establish the claim of the defendant in a litigation to be commenced. It is clear that such a contract is against public policy. The recognition of contracts of this character would be the introduc*283tion of all sorts of fraud and deception in proceedings before courts of justice, in order that parties might receive compensation out of the results of their successful manufacture of proofs to be presented to the court, thus holding out a premium upon subornation. The mere statement of the proposition seems to show that such a contract could never be recognized in any court of justice. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.