Hicks v. Bradner
New York Court of Appeals
Russell E. Hides sued Amariah H. Bradner, in the supreme court, to recover damages for criminal conversation with plaintiff’s wife. On the trial, the defendant called as witness the plaintiff’s Wife, to disprove the wrongful act complained of, and she was allowed to testify, against plaintiff’s objection. The jury found for defendant; and judgment thereon having been reversed by the court at general term, and a new trial ordered, defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
*363By the Court.
Miller, J.
It is evident that the judge erred upon the trial in allowing the wife of t the plaintiff to he sworn as a witness and to testify against her husband. At common law, the husband and wife could not be witnesses for or against each other, and this rule of the common law is not changed by the provisions of the Code, which abrogate the disqualification of witnesses by reason of their being parties. These provisions, as they existed when this action was tried, have no application to a case like the one at bar, as has been held in numerous adjudications of the court.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Marsh v. PotterNew York Supreme Court · 1860
- Hasbrouck v. . Vandervoort and HaywardNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
- Smith v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1857