Legal Opinion
Continental Insurance v. Equitable Trust Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 18, 1926PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtProskauer, J.
For the purpose of this motion the allegations of the complaint must be taken as true and liberally construed.'
This action at law seeks (upon rescission for misrepresentation) repayment of the purchase price of bonds of the Green Star Company. In an action predicated upon rescission and not for damage, it is not necessary to allege malafides of the defendant. (Hammond v. Pennock, 61 N. Y. 145; Roberts v. Fisher, 43 id. 159; Williston Sales, § 608.) As is stated by Judge Story in Doggett v. Emerson (7 Fed. Cas. No. 3960): “ The question is not, whether he acted basely and falsely; but whether…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gould v. . Cayuga County National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Hammond v. . PennockNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Whiting v. PriceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Butler v. . PrentissNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Roth v. BaumAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1915
3Cited by5 opinions
- Seneca Wire & Manufacturing Co. v. A. B. Leach & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Continental Insurance v. Equitable Trust Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
- The Continental Ins. v. The Equitable Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1930
- Continental Insurance v. Equitable Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1930
- Continental Insurance v. Equitable Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1926