Legal Opinion

Clopton v. Martin

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 15, 1847PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Writ of Error to the Court of Chancery for the thirty-second district. Martin is the complainant in this bill, and by it he alledges that on the 17th December, 1841, he sold and delivered to the defendant, Clopton, a certain slave, for the price of $700. That the sale and delivery was made without any warranty as to the health and soundness of the slave, and so accepted by the purchaser. Some years previous to the sale, the slave had been afflicted with spasms or fits.

Read the full summary

Writ of Error to the Court of Chancery for the thirty-second district. Martin is the complainant in this bill, and by it he alledges that on the 17th December, 1841, he sold and delivered to the defendant, Clopton, a certain slave, for the price of $700. That the sale and delivery was made without any warranty as to the health and soundness of the slave, and so accepted by the purchaser. Some years previous to the sale, the slave had been afflicted with spasms or fits. Of this the complainant fully informed Clopton before the sale. In the conversations previous to the sale, the complainant…

1Opinion of the CourtGoldthwaite, J.

The reformation of written agreements, when, by mistake, they express more or less than the parties intended, is now a well established branch'.of equity jurisdiction, but if the proofs are doubtful and unsatisfactory, and the mistake is not entirely plain, equity will withhold relief on the ground that the written paper -ought to be treated as a full and correct expression of the intent, until the contrary is established beyond reasonable controversy. [1 Story’s Eq. § 152, and cases there cited.]

If, as the counsel for the defendant supposes, the proof in this cause established the contract…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Lestrade v. BarthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
  2. Larkins v. BiddleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
  3. Stone v. HaleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1850
  4. Ruhling v. HackettNevada Supreme Court · 1865
  5. Gross Const. Co. v. HalesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API