Hallahan v. Webber
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendants, George C. Webber and another* from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme- Court, in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Hew York on the 24th day of January, 1896, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Hew York Special Term.
1Opinion of the Court
Van Brunt, P. J.:
In the cases of Masson v. Bovet (1 Den. 69); Cobb v. Hatfield (46 N. Y. 533); Hammond v. Pennock (61 id. 145); Schiffer v. Dietz (83 id. 300); Strong v. Strong (102 id. 69), and many other cases-which might be cited, it. is stated that it is a settled rule -that the right to rescind a contract for fraud must be exercised immediately upon its discovery,, and that any delay in doing, so will be deemed, an election to affirm the contract.
*123Applying this rule to the facts disclosed by the record before us in the case at bar, it is evident that the plaintiff was not in a position on…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Masson v. BovetCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
- Cobb v. . HatfieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Pickslay v. . StarrNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
3Cited by14 opinions
- McQueen v. BurhansSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
- Charles E. Quincy & Co. Arbitrage Corp. v. Cities Service Co.New York Supreme Court · 1935
- J. J. Little & Ives Co. v. Lamb Publishing Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1919
- Martin-Barris Co. v. JacksonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
- Trowbridge v. OehmsenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.