Butler v. Livermore
New York Supreme Court
CTIObT-to recover back the sum of $45,000, the price of certain shales of stock in a gold company, which the plaintiffs allege they were induced hy certain false and fraudulent representations of the defendants, set forth in the complaint, to buy of them; the plaintiffs offering to return and transfer the stock to the defendants. The action Was tried at special term before the court, without a jury
1Opinion of the CourtSutherland, J.
Before the Code, indebitatus assumpsit would lie to recover hack money obtained or paid by actionable deceit, or false and fraudulent misrepresentations.
Since the Code, so far as it may be proper to call or classify actions by names, it has been and is proper to say, that indebitatus assumpsit lies to recover back money thus obtained or paid.
And it seems, notwithstanding this remedy at law, the defrauded party might resort to a court of equity and recover his money back. (Cott v. Woollaston, 2 P. Williams, 154. Green v. Barrett, 1 Simons, 45. Blain v. Ager, 2 Id. 205.)
The court of chancery,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Walter v. . BennettNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Bradley v. BosleyNew York Court of Chancery · 1845
- Hearsey v. PruynNew York Supreme Court · 1810
- Andrews v. BondNew York Supreme Court · 1853
- Ransom v. WetmoreNew York Supreme Court · 1862
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Nathan v. WoolvertonNew York Supreme Court · 1910
- Goo Yee v. RosenbergHawaii Supreme Court · 1913
- Moss v. WittemanNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893
- Cohen v. EllisNew York Supreme Court · 1885