French & American Importing Co. v. Belleville Drug Co.

86 S.W. 836, 75 Ark. 95, 1905 Ark. LEXIS 539
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided April 15, 1905·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Battle, J.

The demurrer to defendant’s answer was properly overruled. The answer, if true, shows that the contract and order for goods, sued on, were procured by false representations knowingly made by plaintiff to defendant as to a material fact, with intent to mislead; and that it did mislead it to its injury. The. misrepresentation was that the plaintiff had not sold any goods of the class contracted for by defendant to any one in the town of Belleville, before the contract sued on was made, when in fact it had already done so. This was one of the material inducements that led to the making of the contract, without which, as shown by the answer, the defendant would not have entered into it. Having been obtained by fraud, it is voidable.

Judgment affirmed.

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

French & American Importing Co. v. Belleville Drug Co., 86 S.W. 836, 75 Ark. 95, 1905 Ark. LEXIS 539 (Ark. 1905).

86 S.W. 836 (French & American Importing Co. v. Belleville Drug Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bankers' Utilities Co. v. Cotton Belt Savings & Trust Co.
237 S.W. 707 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1922)
Outcault Advertising Co. v. Young
161 S.W. 142 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1913)
Arkansas Mutual Fire Insurance v. Claiborne
100 S.W. 751 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1907)