Monell v. Colden
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action on'the case for a fraudulent representation in the sale of land. The declaration contained six counts.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action on'the case for a fraudulent representation in the sale of land. The declaration contained six counts. The first count stated that the defendant, on the first of June, 1610, claiming to be seised in fee of a certain lot of land, situate in the village of Newburgh, in the county of Orange, bounded, &c., (here the boundaries were set forth, one of which is the high-water markon the west side of the Hudson,) containing 146,206 and 1-2 square feet; that, on the same day, a conversation was had between the parties, of and concerning the sale of the said land, by the defendant to…
1Opinion of the Court
Thompson^ Ch, J,,
delivered the‘opinion of the court. The declaration in this case contains six counts, varying in some-' small, and mostly immaterial, circumstances, the plaintiffs5' cause of action. To this declaration there is a general demurrer, which admits the facts therein stated. If, therefore, any of the counts. se!: forth facts sufficient to make out a cause of action, the plaintiffs are entitled to judgment. Without noticing each count separately, it will be sufficient to state, generally, that the facts alleged are, substantially, that, a conversation was had between the parties…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Durkin v. CobleighMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Andrus v. St. Louis Smelting & Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Henderson v. HenshallCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1893
- Paxton-Eckman Chemical Co. v. MundellIndiana Court of Appeals · 1916
- Carvill v. JacksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.