State v. Kavanaugh

My principal reason for dissenting from the prevailing opinion in this case is that the indictment does not charge that the defendant obtained Mrs. Hancock’s shares of American Gas &. Power Company stock by means of a false pretense or false representation concerning a past or present fact. On the contrary, the accusation is merely that Kavanaugh obtained the shares of stock under a contract with Mrs. Hancock, by which he agreed to exchange her shares of stock for 120 shares of Louisiana Power & Light Company stock within 30 days, or return to Mrs. Hancock her shares of American Gas & Power…