Barker v. Kallash
New York Court of Appeals
1ConcurrenceJasen, J.
While I agree with the result reached by the majority, I write to express my view of the basis and the boundaries of the rule to be applied in this case.
To permit an action for injuries sustained as a consequence of the plaintiff’s own grievous criminal conduct — the construction of a “pipe bomb” — would contravene fundamental public policy of this State. It is a basic principle recognized by the courts throughout this country that no person shall be permitted to take advantage of his own *30wrongdoing by predicating a legal or equitable claim upon his fraudulent, immoral or illegal conduct. (1…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Olmstead v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Riggs v. . PalmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Martin v. HerzogNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Scurti v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- McConnell v. Commonwealth Pictures Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1960
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.