From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Diamond v. Diamond

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Feb 13, 1953
94 A.2d 569 (Pa. 1953)

Opinion

January 8, 1953.

February 13, 1953.

Equity — Jurisdiction — Injunction — Criminal misconduct — Adultery.

1. A court of equity will not enjoin the commission of adultery. [563].

2. Equity will not enjoin the commission of a crime. [563]

3. Courts of equity in Pennsylvania are concerned only where property rights are involved. [563]

Before STERN, C. J., STEARNE, BELL, CHIDSEY and ARNOLD, JJ.

Appeal, No. 233, Jan. T., 1952, from order of Court of Common Pleas No. 1 of Philadelphia County, Dec. T., 1951, No. 6270, in case of Gertrude Diamond v. Leonard Diamond, Dorothy Lerner and Gussie Stein. Order affirmed.

Bill in equity.

Defendants' preliminary objections sustained and decree entered dismissing bill, opinion by KUN, P.J. Plaintiff appealed.

Harry R. Back, with him Back Levy, for appellant. Henry W. Maxmin, with him Daniel L. Quinlan, Jr., Myron Jacoby and Jacoby Maxmin, for appellees.


On preliminary objections the court below dismissed the plaintiff's bill in equity and she appeals.

At the instance of the wife the bill, in plain language, seeks to enjoin her husband, Leonard Diamond, from committing adultery with Gussie Stein, and also to restrain Dorothy Lerner, who is alleged to have been an aider and abettor of the principal defendant's acts.

While it may be convenient to restrain the errant spouse, nevertheless it is without authority under the law of Pennsylvania.

In the first place, equity will not enjoin the commission of a crime: Commonwealth v. Smith, 266 Pa. 511, 109 A. 786, 9 A.L.R. 922. In the second place, courts of equity in Pennsylvania are concerned only where property rights are involved. See Heasley v. Operative Plasterers Cement Finishers International Association, Local No. 31, 324 Pa. 257, 188 A. 206; Kenneck v. Pennock, 305 Pa. 288, 157 A. 613; Ashinsky v. Levenson, 256 Pa. 14, 100 A. 491.

The order of the court below sustaining preliminary objections and dismissing the bill, is affirmed; appellant to pay the costs.


Summaries of

Diamond v. Diamond

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Feb 13, 1953
94 A.2d 569 (Pa. 1953)
Case details for

Diamond v. Diamond

Case Details

Full title:Diamond, Appellant, v. Diamond

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Feb 13, 1953

Citations

94 A.2d 569 (Pa. 1953)
94 A.2d 569

Citing Cases

Jacobs v. Fetzer

Equity has possessed from time immemorial jurisdiction to protect property rights, especially when there is…

Everett v. Harron

It being clear, then, that plaintiffs have a right to proceed against defendants in a civil action to recover…