Drake v. Fairmont Drain Tile & Brick Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Martin county to rescind plaintiff’s agreement to purchase defendant’s stock and to recover $2,500. The answer denied that defendant sold its stock to plaintiff directly and alleged that the stock was sold to him by one Perry who was its agent. The case was tried before Quinn, J., who made findings and ordered judgment in favor of defendant. Prom the judgment entered pursuant to the order for judgment, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
In this action to rescind the purchase of shares of stock in defendant corporation on the ground that its misrepresentations induced plaintiff to buy, the court, upon stipulated facts, directed judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
Prior to December, 1910, defendant acquired a tract of land at Pairmont, Minnesota, with the intention of erecting an extensive plant for the manufacture of vitrified drainage tiles from the clay deposit on the tract, which clay was supposed to be peculiarly adapted for such product. Subscriptions for shares of stock were obtained from plaintiff and others,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Penn Mut. Life Ins. v. Mechanics' Savings Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1896
- Henderson v. RailroadTexas Supreme Court · 1856
- Frenzel v. MillerIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
- Hubbard v. WeareSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Holcomb v. NobleMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Jacobson v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Helvetia Copper Co. v. Hart-Parr Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- Schlechter v. FeltonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Kempf v. RangerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Saupe v. St. Paul Trust Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.