Ray v. Virgin
Illinois Supreme Court
The defendant, Kinsey Virgin, was administrator of an estate. At the sale of the personal property of said estate by said Virgin, the plaintiff in error bought two horses, and gave the note sued on. The suit was brought before a justice of the.peace, and a judgment rendered against Ray for the amount of the note, and he took an appeal to the Circuit Court.
Read the full summary
The defendant, Kinsey Virgin, was administrator of an estate. At the sale of the personal property of said estate by said Virgin, the plaintiff in error bought two horses, and gave the note sued on. The suit was brought before a justice of the.peace, and a judgment rendered against Ray for the amount of the note, and he took an appeal to the Circuit Court. Upon the trial in that Court, the defendant below, proved that the sale of said horses was made by Ray in person, at a public, auction. That he represented, that said horses were sound and free from all diseases, except the horse distemper;…
1Opinion of the CourtCaton, J.
The only question in this case is, whether a party who has given a note for goods purchased at an administrator’s sale, may show in his defence to the note, that the administrator fraudulently represented the goods to be sound, when he knew them to be unsound. This precise question was decided in the case of Rice v. Richardson, 3 Alabama, 438, where such a defence was held to be admissible. Of the correctness of that decision I entertain no doubt. It is sustained by every principle of reason, of justice, and of public policy. It would never do to allow administrators, and other fiduciary…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Black v. WaltonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1877
- Bormann v. SimpsonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1977
- Matter of Estate of WitzkeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1984
- Bingham v. MaxcyIllinois Supreme Court · 1853
- Stanton v. Estate of JohnsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.