Lorraine v. Long
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, County of Tuolumne. This was a bill filed in the Court below by the appellants, asking to have a certain agreement, entered into between the plaintiffs and defendant, reformed, on the ground of mistake and fraud.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, County of Tuolumne. This was a bill filed in the Court below by the appellants, asking to have a certain agreement, entered into between the plaintiffs and defendant, reformed, on the ground of mistake and fraud. The paper purported to be a settlement of a partnership debt due from plaintiffs to defendant, wherein it is alleged that it was intended and agreed that the settlement was to cover all demands; the plaintiffs contend that the defendant fraudulently procured the execution of the written agreement. Plaintiffs state also…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Heydenfeldt
Mr. Chief Justice Murray concurred.
Although a party may set up an equitable defence to an action at law, his remedy is not confined to that proceeding. He may let the judgment go at law and file his bill in equity for relief. Our practice, while it enlarges the field of remedy, does not take away pre-existing remedies by implication. «
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
2Cited by12 opinions
- Allis v. HallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1904
- Golson v. DunlapCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Citizens Utilities Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Hill v. CooperOregon Supreme Court · 1876
- Johnson v. Sun Realty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1934
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.