Case v. Ayers

Citations

• 65 Ill. 142

Syllabus

<p>1. Fraud and deceit—what necessm-y to constitute, in sale of goods. In an action by the vendee, against the vendor of a load of wool, done up in fleeces, for fraudulent representations as to the quality and condition of the wool, the court, in effect, instructed the jury that although they might believe the representations were made, and that they were false in the manner stated, still the plaintiff could not recover, unless the representations were made with the design to injure the plaintiff: Held, that such instruction was erroneous, and well calculated to mislead the jury.</p> <p>3. Where the vendor of goods makes a representation respecting the quality or condition of the articles sold, which he must, from the very nature of the case, have known to be false, whereby injury results to the purchaser, it will be a fraud in law, on the part of the vendor, and proof of a fraudulent design to injure the purchaser is not necessary to entitle him to recover.</p> <p>3. And it seems that fraud will be inferred where a party makes a representation as to which he has no knowledge or infiftmation, and no grounds for expressing his belief, if injury results from the falsity of such representation.</p> <p>4. Same —fraudulent representations must he negatived in the proof. In a suit by a purchaser to recover damages of a seller of personal property, on the ground of false and fraudulent representations respecting the property, an instrtiction, on the part of the plaintiff, which does not require the particular false representations supposed to have been made to be negatived by the proof, will be properly refused.</p>