Jaffe v. Weld
Max Jaffe Et Al., Appellants, v. Stephen M. Weld Et Al., Respondents
Subsequent history: aff'd sub nom. Knauth, Nachod & Kuhne v. Latham & Co., 242 U.S. 426 (1917). (read from the later opinion; check before relying)
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Order affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the negative. There can be no doubt of the rule that funds obtained by fraud may be followed through however many transmutations of form they may have passed so long as the rights of a third party for value and in good faith do not intervene; but this complaint, though prolix to a degree not easy to characterize, is so replete with hypothetical and alternative allegations that it is not possible on any reasonable interpretation to spell out any direct allegation that the *594 money obtained from these plaintiffs did in fact pass into the cotton upon which it is sought to impress a trust; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Werner,' Hiscock, Collin and Cuddeback, JJ.; Miller, J., takes no part.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 9 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Supreme Court1
- U.S. Courts of Appeals1
- State Highest Courts1
- State Appellate Courts5
- State Trial Courts1
Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.