Pugsley v. Pugsley
New York Court of Chancery
The bill in this case was filed by the wife for a dissolution of the marriage contract, on the ground of the adultery of the husband. The bill alleged that the parties were married in the city of Albany in 1835, and that from that time both parties had been and still were inhabitants of this state. The first act of adultery wTas charged to have been committed with an inmate of a house of ill fame in the city of New-York, in 1838, whose name was unknown to the complainant.
Read the full summary
The bill in this case was filed by the wife for a dissolution of the marriage contract, on the ground of the adultery of the husband. The bill alleged that the parties were married in the city of Albany in 1835, and that from that time both parties had been and still were inhabitants of this state. The first act of adultery wTas charged to have been committed with an inmate of a house of ill fame in the city of New-York, in 1838, whose name was unknown to the complainant. And several similar of-fences were charged as having taken place in the defendant’s law office in Albany, with several…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The proof is satisfactory as to the adultery. For it is evident, from the testimony of Carr, that the strange female with whom the defendant was found in bed in New-York, in the fall of 1838, was not the complainant, with whom the witness was acquainted. But the *590master’s report is defective in relation to the other matters referred to him. Under the usual order of reference, to take proof of all the material facts charged in the bill and to report such proof to the court with his opinion thereon, the master should require proof of the facts which are necessary to give this…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Blott v. RiderNew York Supreme Court · 1873
- Finn v. FinnNew York Supreme Court · 1878
- Arborgast v. ArborgastNew York Supreme Court · 1853