Gray v. Hafer
Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati
Plaintiffs seek to recover damages for breach of trust. It is alleged — ■ 1. That defendant occupied towards plaintiffs a special relation of confidence and trust, and that by reason thereof he was charged with all the duties and obligations of a trustee. That before purchasing the stock of plaintiffs it was his duty to make full and frank disclosure of all material- facts affecting the value thereof.
Read the full summary
Plaintiffs seek to recover damages for breach of trust. It is alleged — ■ 1. That defendant occupied towards plaintiffs a special relation of confidence and trust, and that by reason thereof he was charged with all the duties and obligations of a trustee. That before purchasing the stock of plaintiffs it was his duty to make full and frank disclosure of all material- facts affecting the value thereof. That having failed to do so, he is liable for their loss occasioned by failure to disclose. 2. In agreeing to aid plaintiffs find a customer for their stock, he became their agent for a sale…
1Opinion of the Court
At the trial below defendant offered no proof, and the case was submitted on the evidence of the plaintiffs. Judgment was for defendant. The facts were as follows: Plaintiffs were the administrators of B. S. Brown, who owned certain stock and bonds of the C. L. & N. Railroad, of which defendant was president. During his lifetime, Mr. Brown, on occasions, advised with defendant with reference to said stock, sent to him his proxy to vote it, and offered to send his bonds for sale when they reached a certain price in the market, but never actually placed either his stock or bonds in defendant’s…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Colton v. StanfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- McNamara v. McNamaraSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
- Fletcher v. BartlettMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Spratt v. Wilson, Martin & LeedySupreme Court of Alabama · 1891