Stevens v. McIntire
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Assumpsit on a note of hand, given by the defendant to the plaintiffs, dated March 18, 1833, for $500, in 90 days and interest. The execution of the note was admitted, but the right of the plaintiffs to recover was resisted, on the ground of fraud and misrepresentation on their part.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on a note of hand, given by the defendant to the plaintiffs, dated March 18, 1833, for $500, in 90 days and interest. The execution of the note was admitted, but the right of the plaintiffs to recover was resisted, on the ground of fraud and misrepresentation on their part. TÍie defendant introduced evidence tending to prove, that on the lOf/t day of March, 1833, one Hatch, being the owner of a bond from Reed If Porter, conditioned to convey to him a township of land, sold and assigned one half thereof to the plaintiffs for the sum of $500. ' The defendant also introduced evidence…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court, after a continuance nisi, was drawn up by
Weston C. J.
If the defendant would rescind the contract, out of which the note in controversy grew, on the ground of fraud, he should, as soon as he discovered the fact, have given notice to this effect, to the plaintiffs, assigning or offering to assign to them what he received, or the proceeds of it. This is required by the uniform current of authorities.
From the view we have taken of the cause, we do not regard as material the testimony of Edward P. Baldwin, the admissibility of which was objected to by the counsel for the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Reab v. McAlisterCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1831
- Conner v. HendersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1818
- M'Allister v. ReabNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Beecker & Beecker v. VroomanNew York Supreme Court · 1816
- Miller v. SmithU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1818
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.