Legal Opinion
Bloomquist v. Farson
New York Supreme Court
Decided January 15, 1915PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Actions in equity to set aside the purchase and exchange of certain bonds.
1Opinion of the CourtWheeleb, J.
These two actions were tried together, and present substantially the same questions of law, although the facts in the two cases are somewhat different. The transactions out of which these actions spring were consummated with each plaintiff by and through the same agency, and at substantially the same time.
The actions were brought in equity to set aside the *616purchase and exchange of certain bonds on the ground that the sale was induced by false and fraudulent representations in regard to them.
In November, 1910, the plaintiff Bloomquist purchased of the defendants ten bonds of the North Sterling…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hammond v. . PennockNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Rothschild v. . MackNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Taylor v. . Commercial BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
- Wilcox v. Iowa Wesleyan UniversitySupreme Court of Iowa · 1871
- Carr v. . Nat. Bank and Loan Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1901
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Buffalo Rubber Manufacturing Co. v. Batavia Rubber Co.New York Supreme Court · 1915
- Bloomquist v. FarsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
- Battle v. CalavittaNew York Supreme Court · 1928