Legal Opinion

Ziegler v. Stinson

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided April 8, 1924PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRand, J.

The principles of law applicable to the foregoing facts are well settled. A party to *251a contract for the exchange of goods, chattels or real property, who was induced to enter into the contract by false and fraudulent representations, may, at his election, after knowledge of the fraud, rescind the contract and recover back what he has parted with, provided always that the parties can be restored to the position in which they stood at the time the contract was entered into: Kerr on Fraud (5 ed.), p. 386.

A party, in ignorance of the true facts to whom false and fraudulent representations are…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Cawston v. SturgisOregon Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Wimer v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1892
  3. David v. MooreOregon Supreme Court · 1905

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Horner v. WagyOregon Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Linebaugh v. Portland Mortgage Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Pace v. Edgemont Investment Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Shafer Et Ux. v. Ekstrand Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Hunt v. RingOregon Supreme Court · 1928

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API