Skip to Content

Decisions of the Superior Courts of New South Wales, 1788-1899

Solomon v. Gerson [1889] NSWSupC 2

seduction, damages, seduction

Supreme Court of New South Wales

Stephen J., 25 July 1889

Source: Sydney Morning Herald, 26 July 1889, p. 10

No. 2 Jury Court - (Before his Honor Mr. Justice Stephen and a jury of four.)


Mr. O'Connor, instructed by Messrs. Slattery and Heydon, appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Edmunds, instructed by Messrs. Want, Johnson and Co., for the defendant. This was an action brought by Susan Solomon, widow, against Maurice Frank Gerson, commission agent, to recover damages for the alleged seduction by him of her daughter, Leah Victoria Solomon.

The evidence and the addresses of counsel concluded on the previous day.

His Honor in summing up pointed out the deplorably contradictory nature of the evidence, and said that if the story told by Miss Solomons was true, the defendant should have been prosecuted criminally. It was certain that on one side or the other the most wilful perjury had been committed, and he would leave the jury to draw their own conclusions from the evidence and what they had seen of the demeanour of the witnesses. If they considered that plaintiff had made out her case, she would be entitled to substantial damages, not only for the loss of her daughter's services, but the expense which she had been put to, and the shame and dishonour which, if the evidence of behalf of the plaintiff was true, had been occasioned by defendant's conduct.

The jury retired at 10.40 a.m., and at 3.40 p.m. they intimated that they were prepared with a verdict by a majority. This was accepted, and a verdict was returned for the plaintiff with damages £250.

Published by the Division of Law, Macquarie University