## Facts

- Jacqueline Kober sued Josef Kober for annulment based on fraud; only the second cause of action was at issue on appeal.
- The parties married in New York City on June 28, 1963; the annulment action was filed in April 1964.
- The complaint alleged Josef fraudulently concealed, before and at the time of marriage, that he had been an officer in the German Army and a member of the Nazi Party during World War II.
- The complaint alleged Josef also concealed that he was fanatically anti-Semitic and believed in, approved, and applauded Hitler’s “Final Solution.”
- Jacqueline alleged she would not have married Josef had she known these facts.
- The complaint further alleged Josef attempted to control Jacqueline’s social life by pressuring her to discontinue or limit contact with Jewish friends.
- The trial court denied Josef’s motion to dismiss for legal insufficiency, leaving the “vital to the marriage relationship” question for trial.
- The Appellate Division reversed and dismissed, concluding the alleged fraud was not sufficiently vital to the marriage relationship.

## Issues

1. Whether allegations that a spouse concealed Nazi Party membership, Nazi military service, and extreme anti-Semitic beliefs state fraud “vital to the marriage relation” sufficient to support an annulment claim.
2. Whether dismissal at the pleading stage was improper where the allegations, if proven, could go to the essence of marital consent.

## Decision

- The New York Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division.
- The Court held the complaint sufficiently alleged fraud that could be “vital to the marriage relation.”
- The second cause of action was reinstated to proceed, with the factual truth of the allegations and their effect on consent to be determined at trial.

## Legal Principles

- Annulment for fraud requires deception that is material and “vital to the marriage relationship,” not merely a misrepresentation that would have influenced a spouse’s choice.
- Misstatements or concealment about nonessential matters (such as wealth, social position, or ordinary personal traits) generally do not justify annulment.
- Concealment may be actionable where it concerns matters so basic to the marital relationship that they can vitiate consent to marry.
- On a motion to dismiss, the court assumes the pleaded facts are true and asks only whether they state a legally sufficient claim; close questions about “vital” fraud and reliance are ordinarily for trial.

## Conclusion

The court held that alleged concealment of Nazi affiliation and extreme anti-Semitic beliefs could constitute fraud going to the essence of marital consent, so the annulment claim was legally sufficient and should not have been dismissed before trial.


Kober v. Kober, 16 N.Y.2d 191, 211 N.E.2d 817 (N.Y. 1965)