TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Nixon & Co. v. Carson

Nixon & Co. v. Carson, 38 Iowa 338 (1874)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Iowa · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 4, 1874
Judges
Beok
Citations
38 Iowa 338
Headnotes
1. Fraudulent representations: made prior to consummation op contract. False and fraudulent representations made prior to the - consummation of the contract and an inducement thereto, relied upon by the other party, will defeat a recovery by the guilty party. 2. -: evidence. Such fraudulent representations may be established by extrinsic parol evidence.
Summary
Appeal from Johnson Circuit Court. Action at law upon a contract in the following words: “ Messrs Nixon & Oo: Please manufacture and have ready for delivery in Chicago, by. the 15th, of April 1869, twelve of your Alliance Double Shovel Plows, for which I agree to pay you eighty-four dollars on or before the first day of June, 1869. Thos. C. Carson.” Iowa City, March 1, 1869. The answer admits the making of the contract and the receipt of twelve plows in Chicago, but denies any indebtedness above $20, which, defendant alleges, is equal to the amount due plaintiff, and a tender of that sum is pleaded with costs. It is also alleged that plaintiff ought not to recover a greater sum than the amount tendered, because of false and fraudulent representations concerning the character and qualities of the plows contracted for, made prior to the order, and a warranty concerning the same, that such representations and warranty were relied upon by defendant, and constituted the inducement for the contract on his part. The failure of the plows to comply with the representations and warranty is averred. To this answer plaintiff* demurred on the ground that the contract cannot be affected by any representations or warranty made prior to the execution of the contract, and that no fraud is alleged in the making of the contract. The demurrer was sustained. Defendant appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Beok

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Beok, J.

fraudulent tfoií^made summation' of contract. — The demurrer should have been overruled. False and fraudulent representations as to the subject matter of a contract, relied upon by the other party, which operated as an inducement thereto, will defeat recovery by the guilty party. The fact that the frau¿ was perpetrated prior to the execution of the contract does not change the rule. Indeed to bring a case within the rule the fraud, of necessity, must have been perpetrated before the consummation of the contract, otherwise it could not have operated as an inducement thereto. It was entirely competent to establish the fraudulent and false representations by extrinsic parol evidence. These principles are elementary and do not demand for their support the citation of authorities. But see 2 Parsons on Contracts, p. 66, and Chap. 3, Sec. 12 and notes, 1 Greenleaf’s Ev., Sec. 284. Rohrabacher v. Ware, Sept. Term, 1873.

The fraudulent representations are sufficiently averred in the answer.

Beversed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1893: 11896: 11902: 11911: 11916: 118932026peak 1893 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Lavalleur v. Hahn132 N.W. 877 (Iowa 1911)
  2. McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. Williams99 Iowa 601 (1896)
  3. McDowell v. Caldwell89 N.W. 1111 (Iowa 1902)
  4. Scroggin v. Wood87 Iowa 497 (1893)
  5. Houge v. Saint Paul Fire & Marine Insurance174 Iowa 607 (1916)

Most recent

  1. Houge v. Saint Paul Fire & Marine Insurance174 Iowa 607 (1916)
  2. Lavalleur v. Hahn132 N.W. 877 (Iowa 1911)
  3. McDowell v. Caldwell89 N.W. 1111 (Iowa 1902)
  4. McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. Williams99 Iowa 601 (1896)
  5. Scroggin v. Wood87 Iowa 497 (1893)

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.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list