Holmes v. Clark
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Polk District Court. Action for damages sustained by reason of false and fraudulent representations alleged to have been made by tbe defendant to tbe plaintiff in tbe sale of certain lands. Issue joined, trial, and verdict for tbe plaintiff. Defendant appeals. I. There can be no recovery for false representations made in a sale, unless they were known to be false by tbe vendor, and were made with tbe intention to deceive.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Polk District Court. Action for damages sustained by reason of false and fraudulent representations alleged to have been made by tbe defendant to tbe plaintiff in tbe sale of certain lands. Issue joined, trial, and verdict for tbe plaintiff. Defendant appeals. I. There can be no recovery for false representations made in a sale, unless they were known to be false by tbe vendor, and were made with tbe intention to deceive. Chandelor v. hopas, 1 Smith’s L. C. 77 (marg.) Pasley v. Freeman, 2 lb. 55; Eayeraft v. Creary, 2 East. 92; Ward v. Center, 3 John. B. 271; Tipton v. Vail, 6…
1Opinion of the CourtLowe, C. J.
Plaintiff seeks to recover damages for tbe false and fraudulent representations made by defendant to bim, in tbe sale of certain lands, situated some fifteen or twenty miles distant from tbe point of making tbe contract; and upon wbicb representations tbe plaintiff avers be relied in making tbe purchase.
Tbe gist of tbis complaint, tbe fraudulent and false representations, is denied by defendant. Tbe whole of tbe evidence is reported, and whilst it shows that tbe location and quality of tbe lands were entirely different from what was represented, yet it also tends to show that tbe defendant…
2Cited by24 opinions
- Riley v. BellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Watson v. JonesSupreme Court of Florida · 1899
- Boddy v. HenrySupreme Court of Iowa · 1901
- Rolfes v. RusselOregon Supreme Court · 1875
- Wilcox v. Iowa Wesleyan UniversitySupreme Court of Iowa · 1871
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.