Wright v. Boltz
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from White Chancery Court; Jesse C. Hwt, Chancellor; In order to defeat the collection of the purchase money in this case, three things must concur: 'i.
Read the full summary
Appeal from White Chancery Court; Jesse C. Hwt, Chancellor; In order to defeat the collection of the purchase money in this case, three things must concur: 'i. Fraud must have caused an injury, i. e. the price must have been grossly inadequate. 2. The fraud must have been material to the contract, and must have been the inducement to the contract. 3. The injured party must have relied on.the fraudulent statements, and had a right to rely solely upon them in full belief of their truth. 47 Ark. 148; 71 Id. 91. A thorough examination of the place was made, but, if not, ample opportunity was…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, J.
Appellant owned a tract of land in White County, Arkansas, containing 861,55 acre farm and timber land, and sold it to appellee for $17,600, taking in exchange a farm in Illinois owned by appellee at the estimated value of $7,000, which was credited on the purchase price of the Arkansas land. There was a mortgage on the land for $6,750 executed by appellant which appellee assumed, and that, too, was credited on the purchase price. The balance of the purchase price is evidenced by notes executed by appellee, which are recited in the deed and constitute a lien on the land conveyed.
Appellant…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Matlock v. ReppySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- Neely v. RembertSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
3Cited by3 opinions
- Baugh v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1982
- Cannaday v. CosseySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1958
- Baugh v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1982