Wharton v. Fitzgerald

3 U.S. 503
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided June 15, 1799·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

.But,

by the Court

:—This is the cafe of a bona fide pur-chafor, for a valuable confideration, from the heirs of á diflei-for, after a defeent caft, and without notice of the diffeifen, It is impoflible, that any precedent can' be produced,.that' any principle can be fuggefted, to authorife fuch.an a ¿lion. There was an acquiefcence of more than forty years, and all the fails were equally in the knowledge ofboth the parties. This cir-cumftance makes the effential diftinilion between the prefent cafe, and the cafe of Haldane vs. Duche’s Executors; where the fails were in the knowledge of the teftator only; and the ailion was brought againft: the reprefentatives of the perfon bimfelf, who had fuppreiTed, if not mifreprefented, the truth.

Non-Suit.

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

Wharton v. Fitzgerald, 3 U.S. 503 (1799).

3 U.S. 503 (Wharton v. Fitzgerald) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wharton Executors v. Fitzgerald
3 U.S. 503 (Supreme Court, 1799)