Costello v. Sykes
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Hennepin county to cancel a sale of bank stock and to recover $1,300. Defendants demurred to the amended complaint on the- ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The demurrer was sustained, Rockwood, J. From the order sustaining the demurrer, plaintiff appealed.
1DissentHallam, J.
I dissent:
In my opinion the following statement by Williston:
“If parties enter into a bargain on the assumption that certain things are true, it is inequitable to enforce the bargain, to allow it to stand if the mistake relates to a matter so fundamental that it must be assumed that the parties would not have entered into the transaction had they known the truth.” Williston, Sales, § 656, and the following statement by Benjamin:
“When there has been a common mistake as to some essential fact forming an inducement to the sale, that is, when the circumstances justify the inference that no…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Marple v. Minneapolis & St. Louis RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Hoops v. FitzgeraldIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
- Fritzler v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
- Thwing v. Hall & Ducey Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Cobb v. ColeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.