Summary
In Davidson v. Davidson (134 App. Div. 958) it was held that where evidence indicated the guilt of the defendant, even though the intimacy stopped short of actual guilt, the mere fact that no one saw the act was not important, and the judgment for defendant was reversed.
Summary of this case from Kay v. KayOpinion
November, 1909.
Present — Patterson, P.J., Ingraham, McLaughlin, Laughlin and Scott, JJ. Laughlin, J., dissented.
The evidence points irresistibly to the guilt of the defendant. While it is possible that the extreme intimacy between the defendant and the woman not his wife may have stopped short of actual guilt, it is in the highest degree improbable. The mere fact that no one saw the act performed is not controlling. The judgment should be reversed, new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide event.
Judgment reversed, new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide event.