Kingman & Co. v. Stoddard
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
In Error to tbe Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. This is an action for deceit brought by the plaintiff in error, Kingman & Go., a corporation of the state of Illinois, against the Stoddard Manufacturing Company, John W. Stoddard, the Milburn Wagon Company, Charles F. Milburn, and Frank D. Suydan. The Stoddard Manufacturing Company was not served with process and did not appear to the action.
Read the full summary
In Error to tbe Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois. This is an action for deceit brought by the plaintiff in error, Kingman & Go., a corporation of the state of Illinois, against the Stoddard Manufacturing Company, John W. Stoddard, the Milburn Wagon Company, Charles F. Milburn, and Frank D. Suydan. The Stoddard Manufacturing Company was not served with process and did not appear to the action. Kingman & Co. was incorporated for the purpose of and since the year 1882 has been engaged in the business of the manufacture and sale of agricultural implements…
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, Circuit Judge
The rule is well settled that one who has been induced, through, fraud, to enter into a contract has the election either to rescind, tendering back that which he has received, or, affirming the contract, he may have his action for deceit to recover the damages sustained. We, however, understand this rule to have application to a contract executed wholly or in part, and that the affirmance here spoken of has relation to the completed transaction; that is to say, if rescission be desired, and restoration of that received be not made, the contract is affirmed as to whatever has been done under…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Grimes v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- People v. . StephensNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Schmidt v. MesmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Fitzpatrick v. FlannaganSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- McLean v. ClappSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Tuttle v. StovallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
- Board of Water Commissioners v. RobbinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1910
- Simon v. Goodyear Metallic Rubber Shoe Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1900
- Bean v. BickleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1919
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.