People v. Sattlekau
120 A.D. 42, 21 N.Y. Crim. 318, 104 N.Y.S. 805 (1907)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An indictment for larceny by false pretenses is legally sufficient if it alleges the property was obtained 'by color and by aid of' the false representations, as this language necessarily implies the victim's reliance on those representations.
Facts:
- The defendant, Sattlekau, using the alias 'Bachelor' and then 'E. Paul,' placed an advertisement in the New York Herald seeking a 'Good woman' for housekeeping and a 'Possibility of Matrimony.'
- Rosa Kaiser, a lady's maid, responded to the ad and met with Sattlekau on multiple occasions.
- Sattlekau falsely represented to Kaiser that he was a single, wealthy man who owned the 'Uncle Sam Hotel' in Millville, Pennsylvania.
- He also falsely claimed he had an option to lease a New York hotel, 'the Studio,' which would serve as a home for them after they married.
- Sattlekau told Kaiser he needed $1,000 to secure the lease for 'the Studio' and promised to repay her within two weeks.
- Believing his representations of wealth and ownership of the 'Uncle Sam Hotel,' Kaiser gave Sattlekau $1,000 on May 1, 1906.
- Immediately after receiving the money, Sattlekau disappeared, sending Kaiser a fraudulent telegram and letter stating his non-existent hotel had caught fire.
- In reality, Sattlekau was married, the 'Uncle Sam Hotel' did not exist, and he had used similar tactics on other women.
Procedural Posture:
- The People of New York indicted the defendant, Sattlekau, for the crime of grand larceny in the first degree in a state trial court.
- Following a trial, a jury found the defendant guilty as charged.
- The defendant, as appellant, appealed his conviction to the appellate court, with the People of New York as the appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an indictment for larceny by false pretenses sufficiently allege the element of reliance by stating the money was obtained 'by color and by aid of' the false representations, without explicitly stating that the victim 'relied upon' or 'believed' them?
Opinions:
Majority - Clarke, J.
Yes. An indictment for larceny by false pretenses sufficiently alleges reliance when it states the money was obtained 'by color and by aid of' the false representations. The court reasoned that alleging property was obtained 'by' or 'by aid of' a false pretense necessarily implies that the victim relied on that pretense. The court distinguished precedents cited by the defendant, clarifying they addressed the standard of proof at trial, not the sufficiency of pleading in an indictment. The court cited People v. Rice, which held that similar language was a substantial averment of reliance. The court also noted that the prosecution does not need to prove all alleged false representations, only a material one of an existing fact, which was met by the lie about owning the hotel.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the pleading requirements for indictments in fraud cases, specifically regarding the element of reliance. It establishes that precise 'magic words' such as 'relied upon' are not required, so long as the indictment uses language that logically and necessarily implies the causal connection between the misrepresentation and the victim's actions. This lowers the risk of convictions being overturned on a technical pleading defect when the substantive elements of the crime are clearly alleged and proven. The ruling provides prosecutors with a safe harbor by endorsing the use of statutory language like 'by color or aid of' to satisfy the reliance element in an indictment.
