145 A. 94 (Pa. 1928), 127, Matusak v. Kulczewski

Docket Nº:127
Citation:145 A. 94, 295 Pa. 208
Opinion Judge:MR. JUSTICE KEPHART:
Party Name:Matusak v. Kulczewski, Appellant
Attorney:Joseph Knox Stone, with him L. M. Sebring, for appellant. F. G. Moorhead, of Moorhead & Marshall, for appellee.
Judge Panel:Before MOSCHZISKER, C.J., FRAZER, WALLING, SIMPSON, KEPHART, SADLER and SCHAFFER, JJ.
Case Date:November 26, 1928
Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 94

145 A. 94 (Pa. 1928)

295 Pa. 208

Matusak

v.

Kulczewski, Appellant

No. 127

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

November 26, 1928

Argued: October 2, 1928

Appeal, No. 127, March T., 1928, by defendant, from judgment of C.P. Beaver Co., Dec. T., 1926, No. 378, on verdict for plaintiff, in case of Anthony Matusak v. John Kulczewski. Reversed.

Trespass for alienation of wife's affections. Before McCONNEL, J.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $3,000. Defendant appealed.

Errors assigned were rulings on evidence, referred to in opinion of the Supreme Court, quoting record.

The judgment is reversed with a venire facias de novo.

Joseph Knox Stone, with him L. M. Sebring, for appellant. -- If it is admissible to show that the wife, prior to the alleged misconduct with defendant, had been guilty of adultery with other persons, it would be admissible to show that she was an inmate or keeper of a bawdyhouse: Yocum v. Yocum, 3 Pa. Dist. R. 615; Com. v. Schoen, 25 Pa.Super. 211; Com. v. Eagler, 10 Kulp 107; Com. v. Frey, 19 York Co. R. 122.

Defendant sought to offer evidence that the house of plaintiff and his wife was frequented by persons of bad character and reputation, this being one stage in the proof that the wife of plaintiff was a common prostitute, and that she was therefore guilty of adultery or such other conduct before defendant's alleged acts that her credibility was affected or damages mitigated, or that her husband permitting her to keep or to assist him in keeping a bawdyhouse, before the alleged acts of defendant, would have such fact proven against him to affect her credibility and to mitigate damages: Com. v. Eagler, 10 Kulp 107; Yocum v. Yocum, 3 Pa. Dist. R. 615.

F. G. Moorhead, of Moorhead & Marshall, for appellee.

Before MOSCHZISKER, C.J., FRAZER, WALLING, SIMPSON, KEPHART, SADLER and SCHAFFER, JJ.

OPINION

Page 95

[295 Pa. 210] MR. JUSTICE KEPHART:

Defendant, in an action for alienation of affections and criminal conversation, offered to prove as a defense and in mitigation of damages (a) that prior to the injury [295 Pa. 211] complained of plaintiff and his wife were conducting a house of ill repute, and (b) the reputation, for unchastity, drunkenness, gambling and tippling, of the persons who visited the...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP