Crippen v. Hope

The facts in this case are very much the same as when the case was here before. See Crippen v. Hope, 34 Mich., 55.

On the trial below in the present case the plaintiff (defendant in error) sought to avoid the force and effect *345of the settlement "upon which the case was before decided, by evidence tending to prove that such settlement was procured by the defendant through fraud and misrepresentation.

Counsel for defendant, to meet this theory of the case, requested the court to charge the jury that “ if the plaintiff sought to avoid the settlement on the ground of fraud, he could only do so by…