Faust v. Hosford
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Dubuque District Oourt. — Hon. Fred O’Donnell, Judge. Action at law to recover a sum of money said to have been obtained from plaintiff by defendant, as her agent, through fraud and deceit. Trial to a jury, verdict and judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. —
1Opinion of the CourtDeemer, J.
Defendant obtained from plaintiff the sum of $700; she says, as her agent, for the purpose of investing it in first mortgage securities. After obtaining the money, defendant brought plaintiff a note of one Hassett, secured by mortgage on his (Hassett’s) homestead. This was in fact a second mortgage on the property, although plaintiff claims that defendant represented it was a first one when he delivered the same to her, and stated that she (plaintiff) “could depend upon him.” Defendant obtained the money in the year 1892, but there is evidence tending to show that plaintiff did not discover…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Bailey v. GloverSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Rosenthal v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- District Township of Boomer v. FrenchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1875
- Atlantic National Bank v. HarrisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Vigus v. O'BannonIllinois Supreme Court · 1886
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- O'HARA v. KovensCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1986
- Ranck v. City of Cedar RapidsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
- City of Chicago v. LehmannIllinois Supreme Court · 1914
- Christy v. MiulliSupreme Court of Iowa · 2005
- Hinkle v. HargensSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1957
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.