Cranney v. McAlister
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, First District; Hon. W. W. 'Maughan, Judge. Action by A. E. Cranney and others against John A. McAlister. Judgment for plaintiffs and defendant appealed. RESPONDENTS'’ AUTHORITIES. The facts of this case, as shown by the record, constituted appellant the constructive trustee of respondents. (Pomeroy’s Equity, secs. 1044, 1049, 1052; Sweet v. Jacodes, 6 Paige Oh.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, First District; Hon. W. W. 'Maughan, Judge. Action by A. E. Cranney and others against John A. McAlister. Judgment for plaintiffs and defendant appealed. RESPONDENTS'’ AUTHORITIES. The facts of this case, as shown by the record, constituted appellant the constructive trustee of respondents. (Pomeroy’s Equity, secs. 1044, 1049, 1052; Sweet v. Jacodes, 6 Paige Oh. Rep., 355; Gushing v. Danforth, 76 Maine 114, 4 Kent [12 Ed.], 307; Davone v. Fanning, 2 John Ch. Rep., 252; 1 Storey Eq. Jur., sec. 361; Joor v. Williams, 38 Miss. 546; Sanford v. Sanford, .139 IT. S. 642;…
1Opinion of the Court
McCARTY, J.,
(after stating the facts as above.)
It is not claimed, nor does the evidence show, that the respondents, or any of them, were induced to take stock in the Zenoli Silver-Copper Mining Company (which proved to be a profitable investment for each of them) because of any misrepresentation or false statement made by McAlister. Cran-ney, plaintiffs’ principal witness, testified, “Finally we got double what we contemplated for our money.” And the trial court found, which finding is supported by the undisputed evidence, that the stock which cost Cranney only twenty cents per share, and the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- St. Clair v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1927
- Renshaw v. Tracy Loan & Trust Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1934