Sibley v. Holcomb
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 86—RESCISSION— appeal from letoher circuit court. John Holcomb can not escape liability on his warranty unless Sibley or his authorized agent fraudulently misrepresented the contents of the deed; and not then if Holcomb was grossly negligent in not acquainting himself with the provisions of the deed. The deputy county clerk, Fairchild, was not Sibley’s, agent. Borden v. Richmond & Danville Ry. Co., 113 N. C., 570; 37 Am.
Read the full summary
Case 86—RESCISSION— appeal from letoher circuit court. John Holcomb can not escape liability on his warranty unless Sibley or his authorized agent fraudulently misrepresented the contents of the deed; and not then if Holcomb was grossly negligent in not acquainting himself with the provisions of the deed. The deputy county clerk, Fairchild, was not Sibley’s, agent. Borden v. Richmond & Danville Ry. Co., 113 N. C., 570; 37 Am. St. R., 632; Albrecht v. M. & S. Ry Co., 87 Wis., 105; 41 Am. St. R., 30. Fairchild was Sibley’s agent and his misrepresentations were Sibley’s. The general warranty…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HAZELB.IGG
iielivered the opinion oe the court.
The Holcombs — O. G., H. O. and John — claimed to be the owners of some two hundred acres of land in Letcher •county under a survey made, it appears/ subsequently to other surveys and patents to Altemus and others. Whilst so claiming the land, 0. G. and H. C. Holcomb sold to Sibley, a number of trees standing thereon, and executed to him a deed of general warranty therefor. Sibley paid the purchase price to O. G. Holcomb, and it does not appear that John Holcomb had any connection with the transaction or got any benefit therefrom. When…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Kentucky River Consolidated Coal Co. v. FrazierCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
- Kummrow v. Bank of Fergus CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1920