Legal Opinion

Wetzell v. Richcreek

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 14, 1895Published

Error to the Circuit Court of Wood county. The original action was brought in the court of common pleas of Wood county, by Ross Wetzell, against Homer L. Huddle, Jefferson Richcreek and Lewis P. Fertig.

Read the full summary

Error to the Circuit Court of Wood county. The original action was brought in the court of common pleas of Wood county, by Ross Wetzell, against Homer L. Huddle, Jefferson Richcreek and Lewis P. Fertig. The petition alleges that the defendant Huddle, acting for himself, Richcreek and one Weaver, undertook to sell and assign to the plaintiff and the defendant Fertig, a cértain lease made by Michael Heugel, of a tract of land owned by him, in Wood county, to the defendant Richcreek, and by him assigned to Huddle and Weaver; that to induce the purchase, Huddle falsely and fraudulently…

1Opinion of the Court

Williams, J.,

' The plaintiff’s right of recovery was based upon the alleged fraud in the sale and assignment of the lease, and the defendants’ obligation guaranteeing its validity and operative effect; and the part of the charge held by the circuit court to be erroneous, is that by which the jury were instructed that if they- should find, on either ground, for the plaintiff, he was entitled to recover the amount paid for the lease, with interest.

It cannot be doubted that if the plaintiff was induced by the fraud of the defendants to purchase and pay for .the lease, and it proved to be without…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Waldo v. HallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1787
  2. Blair & Gantt v. RankinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1848

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API