Jones v. Stewart
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error from tbe district court of Lancaster county. Tried below before Hall, J. Holcomb, J., dissenting. The active concealment of a material fact has the same effect as an express false representation. Larson, Contracts, 227. In setting aside a transaction as fraudulent, inadequacy of price is a strong circumstance. That suppressio veri is equal to suggestio falsi, is a principle which will prevail. In the absence of a satisfactory reason, it is a badge of fraud.
Read the full summary
Error from tbe district court of Lancaster county. Tried below before Hall, J. Holcomb, J., dissenting. The active concealment of a material fact has the same effect as an express false representation. Larson, Contracts, 227. In setting aside a transaction as fraudulent, inadequacy of price is a strong circumstance. That suppressio veri is equal to suggestio falsi, is a principle which will prevail. In the absence of a satisfactory reason, it is a badge of fraud. Beard v. Campbell, 2 A. K. Marshall [Ky.],-»125. A purchaser is not obliged to disclose a fact to the vendor, which would enhance…
1Opinion of the Court
Day, C.
The facts in this case present a very singular transaction. On and prior to November 12, 1892, Willard E. Stewart was the owner of lots 7 and 8 of College Hill, an addition to the city of Lincoln, upon which was erected a seven-room dwelling-house. The premises were incumbered by a mortgage of $2,000, together with a small *209amount of accumulated interest and taxes. On said day, and for several years prior thereto, the plaintiff, under the name of John T. Jones, treasurer, had on deposit and to his credit in the First National Bank of Lincoln, $2,609.35, and, incomprehensible as it may…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Whitley v. Spokane & Inland Railway Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1913
- Shuttlefield v. NeilSupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
- National American Insurance v. Constructors Bonding Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2006