Wright v. Roach

57 Me. 600
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 1, 1870
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 57 Me. 600 (Wright v. Roach) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wright v. Roach, 57 Me. 600 (Me. 1870).

Opinion

Daneorth., J.

No question is raised by tbe exceptions but that in relation to damages. The jury were instructed that the damages w'ould be the difference between the actual value of the farm conveyed and the price paid for it.

This is not the measure adopted by the later and better authorities. The true rule, as now settled, is the difference between tbe value of the farm as represented, and the actual value as it was when conveyed. In other words, how much more would the farm have been worth if the several representations made by the defendant, which were proved to be at once false, fraudulent, and material, bad been true. Sedgwick on Dam. (5th ed.) 333, 655, and 658. Stiles v. White, 11 Met. 356.

To such sum may be added as damages a sum equivalent to interest from the time when the conveyance was made. Moulton v, Senter, 39 Maine, 287. Brannin v. Johnson, 19 Maine, 362.

Exceptions sustained.

Appleton, C. J.; Cutting, Kent, Walton, and Tapley, JJ., concurred.

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

Related

Noveletsky v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
49 F. Supp. 3d 123 (D. Maine, 2014)
Howe v. Martin
1909 OK 105 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1909)
Hecht v. Metzler
48 P. 37 (Utah Supreme Court, 1897)
Herfort v. Cramer
7 Colo. 483 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 Me. 600, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-roach-me-1870.