
    (34 App. Div. 25.)
    KIRBY v. KIRBY.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
    October 18, 1898.)
    Alienation of Husband’s Affection—Bill of Particulars.
    Defendant in an action for the alienation of a husband’s affection is not entitled to a bill of particulars to the complaint, which alleged only a continued depreciation by defendant to the husband of the plaintiff as a wife.
    Appeal from special term, Dutchess county.
    Action by Sarah A. M. Kirby against Charles H. Kirby for the alienation of her husband’s affection. From an order denying defendant’s motion for a bill of particulars, he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    The following is the opinion of the court below (BARNARD, J.):
    A bill of particulars would be a difficult matter to frame in an action such as this. A wife charges her husband’s uncle with alienating her husband’s affection and breaking up her home. There is no impropriety alleged other than a continued depreciation of the plaintiff as a wife. Such a complaint must be- made out by proof, presumably, of many instances, and probably on many occasions,—here a little and there a little. The general allegation is made: “You depreciated me to my husband, and destroyed my happiness." Such, a- general charge can be easily met. Motion denied, with $10 costs to abide- the event.
    Argued before GOODRICH, P. J., and CULLEN, BARTLETT, HATCH, and WOODWARD, JJ.
    Charles F. Cossum, for appellant. •
    Frank B. Lown, for respondent. 0
    
   PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, opinion oft BARNARD, J., at special term.  