Cochran v. Cummings

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Cochran v. Cummings

4 U.S. 217

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedDecember 15, 1802

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 4 U.S. 217 (Cochran v. Cummings) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cochran v. Cummings, 4 U.S. 217 (1802).

Pincite

Opinion

By Shippen, Chief Justice.

— Wherever there is a gross misrepresentation of facts, relating to the subject of a contract, the contract is fraudulent and void; If, therefore, the jury shall he of opinion, that such a misrepresentation was made, in the present instance, they should consider the conveyance as no payment, although the plaintiffs agreed, under the deception, to accept it in satisfaction; and the verdict must he for damages to the whole amount of the demand.

Verdict, accordingly, for the plaintiffs’ whole demand.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By Shippen, Chief Justice.

— Wherever there is a gross misrepresentation of facts, relating to the subject of a contract, the contract is fraudulent and void; If, therefore, the jury shall he of opinion, that such a misrepresentation was made, in the present instance, they should consider the conveyance as no payment, although the plaintiffs agreed, under the deception, to accept it in satisfaction; and the verdict must he for damages to the whole amount of the demand.

Verdict, accordingly, for the plaintiffs’ whole demand.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 U.S. 217, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cochran-v-cummings-pa-1802.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack