Bauman v. Bowles

Citations

• 51 Ill. 380

Syllabus

<p>1. Fraud—privity of contract not necessary to give the remedy. In an action on the case against two, for fraud practiced by the defendants in selling to the plaintiff certain shares of stock in a pretended company, which had no existence, it was held not essential to a recovery that there should be a privity of contract between the plaintiff and both the defendants; but it was sufficient if one of them made fraudulent representations, as in signing the fraudulent certificates of stock which were sold, and thereby enabled his co-defendant to defraud the plaintiff in the sale of such certificates.</p> <p>3. Error will not always reverse—admitting incompetent evidence. The admission of irrelevant testimony on the trial of a cause will not, of itself, be sufficient ground for reversing the judgment, when no injury resulted thereby to the party complaining of the error.</p>