« PreviousContinue »
Affidavit of Andre E. Murphy, Read in
Support of Motion.
That he is the petitioner in the above captioned matter.
That subsequent to petitioner's honorable discharge from the United States Navy in 1947, deponent married his wife. That deponent's marriage was a happy one which resulted in the
birth of three children. That prior to the birth 96 of deponent's third child, he had permitted in
October, 1952, a friend of his, who had served with him in the Navy, to take up temporary quarters at deponent's house, which consisted of a three floor two family house purchased by petitioner under a G. I. Loan.
Unknown to petitioner, at the time he rented a room to this alleged friend, one named Edwards, was the fact that this Edwards had left his wife in Baltimore. Since Edwards was a seaman in the Merchant Marine, deponent believed him when he was only seeking temporary lodging due to the fact that Edwards' ship was tied up in Brooklyn. Affidavit of Andre E. Murphy.
After a history of events between deponent's wife and his boarder, and upon ascertaining Edwards' marital difficulty, deponent requested that the boarder leave. That petitioner believed that his wife was unfaithful and a series of
arguments and temporary reconciliations ensued.
That in December, 1953, petitioner after an argument separated from his wife. That deponent in an attempt to salvage his marriage went to the Brooklyn Bureau of Social Services, a marriage counseling society. That he was re
98 ferred to a Dr. Deutsch for consultation. That Dr. Deutsch told your deponent he could not solve his marital problem unless a long history was given. Thereupon, petitioner saw Dr. Deutsch twice one week at $15 each visit and once the following week at $15. That on the third visit, Dr. Deutsch told your deponent that there would be many more visits in the future to solve his marital problem. That Dr. Deutsch never conducted any medical examination or asked to speak to deponent's wife. That deponent has been informed by his attorney of certain quoted excerpts from Dr. Deutsch's report and your petitioner 99 denies he ever made same. That said excerpts are completely out of context and are untrue. That after the second visit, deponent had a complete lack of confidence in Dr. Deutsch.
Thereafter, petitioner having been scared by Dr. Deutsch in his desire to keep up the consultation, went to the United States Public Health Service in Staten Island. That after a ten minute interview involving rapid questioning, deponent was told he could come back when they had more time because he was squeezed in between two other interviews.
Affidavit of Andre E. Murphy.
That deponent saw a Dr. Cogville who after an interview stated that deponent was all right. That deponent's sex life is a normal one as practiced between man and wife and that deponent never resorted to any abnormal sexual behaviour as is suggested in Dr. Cogville's report as revealed by petitioner's attorney.
That petitioner saw Dr. Goodhart of the Police Department twice at the request of the respondents. That each interview was very pleasant and
that although Dr. Goodhart had all the above 101
medical reports before him, he said that “he couldn't see anything wrong” with your petitioner. That Dr. Goodhart never conducted any medical examination.
That petitioner saw Dr. Tillum once. That deponent never knew nor was told that Dr. Tillum was a doctor until so informed by his attorney. He had simply been referred by the commission to see a Mr. Tillum. That during said interview there was a stenotypist who recorded some of the questions and answers. That Dr. Tillum neither
conducted any medical examination nor stated any 102 feelings in the matter to your petitioner.
That petitioner was referred to see a Miss Bardash at Bellevue hospital. That she asked deponent to point out designs on about seven ink blots and asked him to draw a figure of a man and one of a woman. That after drawing the figures of the man and the woman, deponent HAD to pick out the good qualities and bad qualities in personality of the figures drawn by him. That during said interview, petitioner was subjected to several questions pertaining to his faith and religion. That deponent felt, and it may have caused an unfavorable impression, that his reAffidavit of Andre E. Murphy.
ligious beliefs and faith were his own concern and not that of the young lady.
That deponent has never been confined to any hospital, institution, or otherwise, or treated for any mental illness. That deponent has never had a “nervous disorder”.
That deponent is presently employed as electronic technician doing government work at the Otis Elevator Co., 35 Ryerson Street, Brooklyn, New York.
That he has never had any difficulty or left any unfavorable impressions on any of his previous employers.
That after serving six months as a probationary patrolman and after deponent's appointment was terminated by the respondents, your petitioner inquired at the respondent commission's office of the reason for his medical disqualifications and he was told that no information could be given him because of a ruling of the Commission.
That petitioner was never afforded a hearing nor an opportunity to refute any of the statements and reports made against him and was completely unaware of their contents until informed by his attorney.
WHEREFORE, deponent respectfully requests the Court to issue an Order granting the relief requested in the petition herein.
(Sworn to by Andre E. Murphy on July 15, 1954.)
Affidavit of Samuel E. Soltz, Read in
Support of Motion.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF
COUNTY OF NEW YORK.
[S A ME TITLE]
STATE OF NEW YORK 107 COUNTY OF NEW YORK
SAMUEL E. SOLTZ, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
That he is duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York and maintains offices for the practice of his profession at 876 Park Avenue, New York City.
That deponent has been a licensed physician in the State of New York since June, 1930. That deponent obtained his Doctor of Medicine from Long Island College Hospital in 1930, and has been a practicing physician specializing in neurology and psychiatry since 1930. That deponent obtained his Doctor of Medical Science from the College of Physicians and Surgeons in 1934. That deponent is an Adjunct Professor in Neurophyschiatry at New York Polyclinic Hospital and Graduate Medical School. The deponent is a Lecturer in Neurology at Long Island School of Medicine, State University. That deponent is an attending neuropsychiatrist at New York Polyclinic Hospital and Long Island College Hospital. That deponent is a member of the American Academy of Neurology, American Psychiatric