People v. Bliskey

12 N.Y. Crim. 472, 21 Misc. 433, 47 N.Y.S. 974
New York County Courts·Decided October 15, 1897·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

DUNMORE, J.

The defendant was convicted in the court; below of being a disorderly person in not supporting his wife, the-complainant. The defendant attempted to show that the complainant had been unfaithful to her marriage vows, and that by reason of her adultery he was not oblige to support her. All evidence tending to establish this defense was objected to by the-people and excluded by the court. This was error, for which the conviction of defendant must be reversed. People v. Brady. 13 Misc. Rep. 294, 34 N. Y. Supp. 1118 ; 2 Wait, Law & Prac. 330 ; 2 Bish. Mar., Div. & Sep. (Ed. 1891) § 1228; Culley v. Charman, 7 Q. B. Div. 89 ; Rex v. Flintan, 1 Barn. & Adol. 227; State v. Schweitzer, 57 Conn, 532, 18. Atl. 787; Carney v. State, 4 South. 84 Ala. 7.

Judgment reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

People v. Bliskey, 12 N.Y. Crim. 472, 21 Misc. 433, 47 N.Y.S. 974 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1897).

12 N.Y. Crim. 472 (People v. Bliskey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Lancaster
133 S.E. 824 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1926)
People v. Horwitz
27 N.Y. Crim. 237 (New York City Magistrates' Court, 1912)