Contracts · MBE-tested

William F. Bridge, Appellant, v. George H. Penniman, Respondent

105 N.Y. 642·New York Court of Appeals·1887·NY

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

William F. Bridge, Appellant, v. George H. Penniman, Respondent. (Argued March 16, 1887; decided April 19, 1887.) This action was brought to recover back the purchase-money paid for certain shares of stock, which purchase was-induced by false representations on the part of defendant. The court hold that the real controversy here “ revolves about the inquiry, whether plaintiff did in fact rescind by tendering-back, without condition, the stock received, or whether, on the contrary he used that stock and its transfer to the defendant as a new consideration for a new contract;” that as this was a question of fact which had been determined adversely to plaintiff upon evidence justifying the finding, it was conclusive. William C. Holbrook for appellant. Joseph H. Choate for respondent. [MAJORITY — Finch, J.,] Finch, J., reads for affirmance, with costs. All concur. Judgment affirmed.