Hysko v. Morawski

Plaintiff, claiming to have rescinded a contract made by him with defendant for the sale of certain personal property because of misrepresentation, brought suit to recover the amount paid by bim thereon. The trial court directed a verdict against him for the reasons that the proofs offered were not sufficient to establish fraud and tha,t he had not rescinded. Plaintiff reviews the judgment entered thereon by writ of error.

Plaintiff’s proofs tended to show that on March 23, 1922, he visited a pool room owned by defendant with a view to purchasing the equipment; that the tables were at that…