Legal Opinion

Redfield v. Frear

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1871Published

Motion to vacate arrest. This action was brought by James H. Redfield against Simeon A. Frear; and it came before the court on a motion to set aside an order of arrest, upon the ground that the cause of action stated in the complaint did not justify it.

Read the full summary

Motion to vacate arrest. This action was brought by James H. Redfield against Simeon A. Frear; and it came before the court on a motion to set aside an order of arrest, upon the ground that the cause of action stated in the complaint did not justify it. The complaint alleged that the defendant, upon the sale of a farm to plaintiff, falsely, fraudulently, and deceitfully represented that it contained over ninety-three acres of land; that it, in fact, did not contain over seventy-three acres; that defendant knew his representations were false and untrue; that plaintiff, relying upon the…

1Opinion of the CourtBoardman, J.

The cause of action in the complaint is, to “recover damages for fraud or deceit.” A case of fraud is clearly stated, and damages alleged as the result of such fraud. In the charging part, .no other cause of action is stated; and no other relief than damages in money could be granted upon the facts alleged. The plaintiff does not seek to rescind the contract, but, affirming it, demands damages for fraud. If all the allegations in the complaint were proved on the trial, the plaintiff could not have a decree for a conveyance from the defendant, nor for a satisfaction of the mortgage given by…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Emery v. . PeaseNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
  2. Smith v. . KnappNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
  3. McGovern v. PaynNew York Supreme Court · 1859
  4. Lambert v. SnowNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1859

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API