COCHRAN v. Cummings

4 U.S. 250, 1 L. Ed. 820, 4 Dall. 250, 1802 U.S. LEXIS 96
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedDecember 1, 1802
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 4 U.S. 250 (COCHRAN v. Cummings) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States 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. 250, 1 L. Ed. 820, 4 Dall. 250, 1802 U.S. LEXIS 96 (1802).

Opinion

4 U.S. 250 (____)
4 Dall. 250

Cochran et al.
versus
Cummings.

Supreme Court of United States.

Ingersoll, and Heatly, for the plaintiffs.

M. Levy, and Porter, for the defendant.

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 be 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 be 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

Related

Pies-Lonsdale v. Banachi
S.D. California, 2022
Farnsworth v. JENSEN
217 P.2d 571 (Utah Supreme Court, 1950)
Sherwood v. Salmon
5 Day 439 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1813)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 U.S. 250, 1 L. Ed. 820, 4 Dall. 250, 1802 U.S. LEXIS 96, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cochran-v-cummings-scotus-1802.