Turner Vs. Ward

Turner vs Ward

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Feb-14-1876

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/82971

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/82971
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: Feb-14-1876
Case Number: 154 U.S. 618
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Turner

Respondent

Ward

Excerpt

.....in favor of the plaintiff will be sustained if the representations proved are of the same general character as those averred in the bill, though not in its precise language. the case is stated in the opinion. mr. chief justice waite delivered the opinion of the court. this case presents for our consideration little else than a question of fact. the plaintiffs charge in substance that they were induced by false representations to sell the defendants certain goods, and asked to have the contract of sale rescinded, and their goods restored. the testimony is all embraced in the depositions of one of the plaintiffs and one of the defendants and an agreed statement. there is some discrepancy between the statements of page 154 u. s. 619 the two witnesses, but it is apparent from the testimony of the defendant, who made the representations complained of, that he himself had been deceived in respect to the pecuniary condition of his firm. it would be but natural, therefore, that he should mislead the plaintiffs. he supposed the firm had stock on hand to the amount of twenty or twenty-five thousand dollars, and owed from five to eight thousand. according to his own statement, he so told the plaintiff. in point of fact, he was mistaken, and his statement was untrue. the firm was largely in debt, and in less than sixty days it failed and made an assignment. before this, however, it executed two chattel mortgages upon the stock, each purporting upon its face to secure the payment of ten thousand dollars, though it appears that the amount actually owing to the mortgagees was not so much. the representations proven are not in the precise language of those averred in the bill, but they are of the same general character, and in our opinion sufficient to justify the decree rendered in the court below, and it is therefore affirmed.

Full Judgment

Turner v. Ward - 154 U.S. 618 (1876)
U.S. Supreme Court Turner v. Ward, 154 U.S. 618 (1876)

Turner v. Ward

No. 129

Argued and submitted January 31, 1876

Decided February 14, 1876

154 U.S. 618

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SYLLABUS

In a suit in equity to set aside a sale of personal property as induced by false representations, a decree in favor of the plaintiff will be sustained if the representations proved are of the same general character as those averred in the bill, though not in its precise language.

The case is stated in the opinion.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

This case presents for our consideration little else than a question of fact. The plaintiffs charge in substance that they were induced by false representations to sell the defendants certain goods, and asked to have the contract of sale rescinded, and their goods restored. The testimony is all embraced in the depositions of one of the plaintiffs and one of the defendants and an agreed statement. There is some discrepancy between the statements of

Page 154 U. S. 619

the two witnesses, but it is apparent from the testimony of the defendant, who made the representations complained of, that he himself had been deceived in respect to the pecuniary condition of his firm.

It would be but natural, therefore, that he should mislead the plaintiffs. He supposed the firm had stock on hand to the amount of twenty or twenty-five thousand dollars, and owed from five to eight thousand. According to his own statement, he so told the plaintiff.

In point of fact, he was mistaken, and his statement was untrue.

The firm was largely in debt, and in less than sixty days it failed and made an assignment. Before this, however, it executed two chattel mortgages upon the stock, each purporting upon its face to secure the payment of ten thousand dollars, though it appears that the amount actually owing to the mortgagees was not so much.

The representations proven are not in the precise language of those averred in the bill, but they are of the same general character, and in our opinion sufficient to justify the decree rendered in the court below, and it is therefore

Affirmed.

Same Parties Turner vs Ward Same Subject Education