A recent New York divorce case sparked interest among law aficionados as well as public opinions. New York Family Court Judge, Debra J. Kiedaisch, had ruled in favor of a man who had hired a private detective to run background checks, investigate and trail his cheating wife to a motel.
The private investigator was able to take footage of the man's cheating spouse having an affair inside the motel with a local priest, who was named only as "Father L.", the priest was assigned to the church where the man's wife worked and was also attended regularly by the man's family, together with every Sunday for mass.
The man's wife filed for divorce back in November of 2008, claims were filed by the husband against her accusing her of having an affair, and on February 26, 2009, an order of protection or restraining order was issued by the courts as requested by the wife, restricting the husband from going near her, and to stay at least 1,000 feet away from the women's residence, workplace except for visitations and church.
The husband, claiming emotional distraught by the fact discovered by the Private Investigator, the husband then reported his discovery to another priest and having him promise not to tell the church officials. Unfortunately the promise was broken, and in September, the church monsignor came to his house and informed him that an investigation was on going regarding the matter so he gave him a copy of the video taken by the private investigator.
During the next months, the husband filed counter claims against his wife. The wife did not deny having an affair with the priest, but her lawyers accused the husband on violating the restraining order by employing the use of a private detective, and that the husband was also to be held accountable for turning over the video evidence which has caused her job and public humiliation.
The New York Judge presiding over the case sided with the husband and then stated that the hiring of the private investigator was not a violation as the purpose was to gather evidence and was considered "legitimate and justifiable".
"The hiring of a professional licensed private investigator in a matrimonial action to gather evidence is for a proper and legitimate purpose," the judge wrote in his decision. She also stated that the background checking and the hiring of the private investigator was not a violation of the rights of the wife stated in the retraining order.
