Legal Opinion

Copeland v. Reynolds

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided January 3, 1933PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.

The parties are at issue on the purchaser’s claim of a rescission of the purchase on learning of the deceit. Each party argues that the judgment in the action for deceit is res adjudicata upon the issue. The purchaser takes the position that the action was predicated upon a prior election to rescind, while the seller argues that it imported an affirmance of the sale. It is not disputed that the judgment settled the purchaser’s right to rescind in her favor. Being defrauded, she was entitled to rescind as a right given her because of the fraud. The controversy relates to her exercise of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Nash v. Minnesota Title Insurance & Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
  2. Page Belting Co. v. PrinceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1914

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Beer v. BennettSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2010
  2. Lovejoy v. AshworthSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1946
  3. Hunt v. Goodimate Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1947
  4. Wiggin v. PeacockSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API