Oppenheim v. Kridel
New York Court of Appeals
140 N.E. 227 (1923)
- Written by Alex Hall, JD
Facts
Jennie Oppenheim (plaintiff) and her husband were separated but still married when he began a relationship with Marth Kridel (defendant) that led to adultery. Oppenheim sued Kridel for criminal conversation—committing adultery and intentionally and knowingly alienating the affection of her husband. Under common law, a husband could bring an action for criminal conversation against another man who committed adultery with his wife or otherwise lured his wife away, but a wife had no comparable right. The action was rooted in the notion that a husband had a possessory right in his wife and the idea that an unfaithful wife would require a husband to support illegitimate children or contend with uncertainty as to his children’s legitimacy. A jury returned a judgment for Oppenheim, but judgment was reversed on appeal because the common law did not recognize a wife’s right to bring an action for criminal conversation. Oppenheim appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Crane, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.