Doyle v. New York, Ontario & Western Railway Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendant, the New York, Ontario and Western Railway Company, from a judgment of the Supreme Court-in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Oswego on the 19th day of October, 1900, upon the verdict of a jury for $400, and also from an order bearing date the 11th day of October, 1900, and entered in said clerk’s office, denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendant, the New York, Ontario and Western Railway Company, from a judgment of the Supreme Court-in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Oswego on the 19th day of October, 1900, upon the verdict of a jury for $400, and also from an order bearing date the 11th day of October, 1900, and entered in said clerk’s office, denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes. The verdict rendered was what is called a sealed verdict and was in the words and figures following, namely, “ $1,200, less the $800 already paid, $400.”…
1Opinion of the Court
McLennan, J.:
It is elementary, as a general proposition, that in order to rescind a contract on the ground of fraud, there must not only be a disaffirmance of it at the earliest practicable moment after the discovery of the fraud, but a return of all that has been received under it, and the restoration of the other party to the condition in which he stood before the contract was made., (Cobb v. Hatfield, 46 N. Y. 533.)
In Masson, v. Bovet (1 Den. 69) the court said: “The party-who would disaffirm a fraudulent contract must return whatever he has- received upon it. This is on a plain and just…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Gould v. . Cayuga County National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Masson v. BovetCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
- Cobb v. . HatfieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Och v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Randall v. . Van WagenenNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Kennedy v. DavisSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
- Lola Burton, as Administratrix of the Estate of William C. Burton v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1964
- Rice v. Postal Telegraph-Cable Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
- Edwards v. SullivanNew York Supreme Court · 1949
- Herman v. P. H. Fitzgibbons Boiler Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.