Kimmel v. Lichty
This text of 3 Yeates 262 (Kimmel v. Lichty) 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.
Opinion
After arguments of counsel, the court declared the law to be, that where one sells an unsound horse, knowing him to be disordered at the time of sale, and conceals that circumstance from the purchaser, but receives a price from him, which the purchaser would not have consented to give, unless for a sound horse, the vendee may recover damages from the vendor for this deceit; aliter, where the seller was wholly ignorant of the horse’s being disordered. But if one sells a horse, warranting him to be sound, the contract will bind the vendor, whether he was ignorant at the time of the horse’s being disordered or not.
Verdict for the defendant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Yeates 262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kimmel-v-lichty-pa-1801.