Pierce & Pierce v. Drake
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. The cause was tried at the Otsego circuit, before Mr. J. Platt.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. The cause was tried at the Otsego circuit, before Mr. J. Platt. At the trial, the counsel for the plaintiffs offered to prove, that on the 4th of January, 1815, the defendant proposed to sell the plaintiffs a note drawn by the President and Directors of the Otsego Card and Wire Manufactory, for 509 dollars and 92 cents, and also two shares in the stock of the Factory, amounting to 224 dollars, and to receive payment in whiskey; that the defendant fraudulently represented, the Company to be good and responsible, and the stock to be…
1Per curiam
The case of Wilson v. Foree, (6 Johns. Rep. 110.) is in point to show that a note taken under such circumstances, is no payment. That case also shows, that the special contract as to the manner of payment being void on account of the fraud, the plaintiff may disregard it, and bring assumpsit for goods sold. The fraudulent representations made by the defendants vitiated the whole contract as to payment. There can be no question that this would have been the situation of the parties, had not the plaintiffs given their notes for the delivery of the whiskey at a future day; but this cannot alter…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Bank of St. Marys v. St. John, Powers & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1854
- Baker v. RobbinsNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Crown Cycle Co. v. BrownOregon Supreme Court · 1901
- Bond v. CorbettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1858
- Bell v. . BallanceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1828
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.