Beecker & Beecker v. Vrooman
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR, tp the court of common pleas of the county .©£ Mamso.n*-s- This Was‘ an actionof assumpsit brought by .F^rboman,, in the - . . , . , r ' V . . court below, agamst the plain tins in error, to recover the price pf a'horsé and a mare sold by Vrooman to the plaintiffs . ' ■ ■■ J ■ F - ' lQ. who; pleaded the general issue, with notice of special maiter to b'e given in evidence.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR, tp the court of common pleas of the county .©£ Mamso.n*-s- This Was‘ an actionof assumpsit brought by .F^rboman,, in the - . . , . , r ' V . . court below, agamst the plain tins in error, to recover the price pf a'horsé and a mare sold by Vrooman to the plaintiffs . ' ■ ■■ J ■ F - ' lQ. who; pleaded the general issue, with notice of special maiter to b'e given in evidence. The plaintiff below having Proved the sale of the .mare to the defendants below, for the priceoff Strdollars, the cpunsel for, thé defeudaiits offered tp prove,. that.-at; the time, of; the sale the mare.was sick…
1Opinion of the Court
Yak Ness, J.,
delivered the opinión' of the court. The defence, offered in th.e court below Wgs improperly excluded.. The defendant below apprised the plaintiff of-his intention to rely for his. defence,, at the trial,'upon, the ffaudy and the es— tablished rulé now appears to be,, that, in cases-like the present, fraud may be givep in evidencé as. a defence, and will be an answer to the whole demand, or in abatement of the damagés, ac- . cording to the circumstances of the case./ This is the true) aw *303well as a salutary rule, and well calculated to do final and compíete justice between the…
2Cited by20 opinions
- McKnight v. DunlopNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Field v. AustinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Withers v. GreeneSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- King v. PaddockNew York Supreme Court · 1820
- Wynn v. HidayIndiana Supreme Court · 1828
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.