Shaw v. Stine
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal by the plaintiffs, Prosper P. Shaw, William. H. Shaw, William W. Bicharás aná William H. King, from an oráer áenying a motion for a new trial. The defendants are Lewis Stine aná Sigismuná B. Menáel, aná on a trial before Mr. Justice Piebbepont aná a jury, June 6, 1859,- obtaineá a veráict.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the plaintiffs, Prosper P. Shaw, William. H. Shaw, William W. Bicharás aná William H. King, from an oráer áenying a motion for a new trial. The defendants are Lewis Stine aná Sigismuná B. Menáel, aná on a trial before Mr. Justice Piebbepont aná a jury, June 6, 1859,- obtaineá a veráict. The action is by the plaintiffs to recover the amount of a bill of gooás solá by them, in July, 1857, to Oohen & Menáel, of Cincinnati, Ohio, by reason of allegeá false and fraudulent representations made my the defendants as to the credit and responsibility of Oohen & Mendel. The plaintiffs gave…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court—White, J.
In an action like the present, in order to entitle the plaintiff to recover, it is not necessary that the fraudulent representations complained of should be the sole consideration or inducement moving the plaintiff to make the sale which deprived him of his property. If the representations contributed to the formation. of the conclusion in his mind to sell, that is enough, although there may have been other inducements operating at the same time, and aiding in leading him to that determination. (Addington v. Allen, 11 Wend., 381.)
A true test in such cases may be found in…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Kley v. . HealyNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Cahn v. ReidMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- City of Columbus v. DahnIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
- Barrett v. WesternNew York Supreme Court · 1870