Miller v. Curtiss

The Superior Court of New York City

Miller v. Curtiss

27 Jones & S. 127, 37 N.Y. St. Rep. 884

CourtThe Superior Court of New York City

DecidedMarch 2, 1891

StatusPublished

This text of 27 Jones & S. 127 (Miller v. Curtiss) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Miller v. Curtiss, 27 Jones & S. 127, 37 N.Y. St. Rep. 884 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.—Dugro, J.

Plaintiff brought his action to recover the amount paid defendant for 15 shares of the Stead Boiler Company. He claims to have been induced to purchase the stock by false and fraudulent statements of defendant, upon which he relied.

The dismissal of the complaint was error, for there-was evidence in the case from which a jury could properly conclude that' certain statements as to existing facts, set forth in the complaint as having been made by defendant, were false, and made by the defendant with intent to deceive, and that the plaintiff was deceived by them and induced to purchase the stock in question. The existence of this evidence was sufficient to require the submission of the case to the jury.

An application of the law as stated in Conkey v. [129]*129Bond, 36 N. Y. 427, to the facts of this case, requires for another and a different reason the disposition made of this appeal.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.

Sedgwick, Ch. J., and Truax, J., concurred.

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