Waller v. Raskan
New York Supreme Court
The plaintiff, in this complaint, averred a sale of goods by himself, on credit, to one Dentz; that plaintiff was, at the time, unacquainted with Dentz, or his means or circumstances; that he was induced to make the sale by certain representations of defendant, that Dentz was solvent and responsible, in good pecuniary circumstances, and worthy of credit, and would undoubtedly pay any amount with which plaintiff might credit him; that these representations were untrue, and…
Read the full summary
The plaintiff, in this complaint, averred a sale of goods by himself, on credit, to one Dentz; that plaintiff was, at the time, unacquainted with Dentz, or his means or circumstances; that he was induced to make the sale by certain representations of defendant, that Dentz was solvent and responsible, in good pecuniary circumstances, and worthy of credit, and would undoubtedly pay any amount with which plaintiff might credit him; that these representations were untrue, and were known to be so by defendant at the time, and were fraudulently made, and plaintiff was thus defrauded, &c.; that…
1Opinion of the Court
Peabody, Justice.
This is a motion to strike out parts of a complaint, as irrelevant and redundant; and also because the parts objected to, state matters of fraud and deceit; and are, therefore, inconsistent with the summons, which is in the form used to commence actions for money demands on contract. The parts which defendant insists should be stricken out, are averments that defendant, on the occasion of a sale of goods to one Dentz, falsely and fraudulently made certain representations, respecting the solvency, pecuniary ability, and credit of said Dentz, which was false, with intent to…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Pierce v. BicknellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1873