White Eagle Oil & Refining Co. v. Baker

The appellant contends that the payment in full settlement of a sum much less than the amount due through the fraud of the defendant Baker did not constitute an accord and satisfaction because of lack of consideration.

It clearly appears that the appellant was deceived as to the amount embezzled by Baker, and entered into the settlement in ignorance of the true amount due. Baker cannot profit by such conduct. He paid nothing by way of compromise of a disputed or unliquidated claim. He had embezzled a large sum in excess of the amount disclosed to appellant. He knew that appellant was misled by…