Friederichsen v. Renard
Citations
- 247 U.S. 207
- 38 S. Ct. 450
- 62 L. Ed. 1075
- 1918 U.S. LEXIS 1974
Syllabus
<p>Plaintiff, having been defrauded in an exchange of lands, sued in the District Court to annul his contract and deed and for incidental damages. The court finding that by acts of ownership he had affirmed the contract, by its order, under Equity Rule 22, transferred the case to the law side as an action for damages for the deceit, and the bill was amended accordingly butwith no substantial change in the allegations of fraud. Meanwhile, the period of the statute of limitations had expired.</p> <p>Held: (1) That the amendment did not change the cause of action and did not constitute the beginning of a new case.,</p> <p>(2) That, since the money relief prayed in the amended petition could properly have been sought as alternative relief in the original bill in equity, and since the transfer to the law side was made upon order of the court in the exercise of its discretion, plaintiff could not be held to have made such an election of inconsistent remedies as would let in the defense of limitations against the amended demand.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “At best this doctrine of election of remedies is a harsh, and now largely obsolete rule, the scope of which should not be extended . . . .”
- “At best this doctrine of election of remedies is a harsh, and now largely obsolete rule, the scope of which should not be extended_”
- “At best this doctrine of election of remedies is a harsh, and now largely obsolete rule, the scope of which should not be extended-”
- plaintiff was not entitled to equitable relief but had remedy at law for damages
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Clarke
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
108 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- United States v. Memphis Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court· 1933-01-09· cited 444×
- Myzel v. FieldsEighth Circuit· 1967-10-12· cited 377×
- Tiller v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court· 1945-01-15· cited 244×
- Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. . Childs Co.New York Court of Appeals· 1921-03-01· cited 163×
- United States v. Oregon Lumber Co.Supreme Court· 1922-11-27· cited 160×
- Glendale Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Marina View Heights Development Co.California Court of Appeal· 1977-01-20· cited 159×
- Ajamian v. SchlangerSupreme Court of New Jersey· 1954-02-15· cited 101×
- Estate Counseling Service, Inc., a Corporation v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated, a CorporationTenth Circuit· 1962-04-09· cited 97×
- Abdallah, Inc. v. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1954-06-25· cited 94×
- Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.California Court of Appeal· 1942-11-30· cited 77×
- Russo v. WilliamsNebraska Supreme Court· 1955-06-17· cited 71×
- Senior Accountants, Analysts & Appraisers Ass'n v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court· 1976-12-31· cited 69×
- Independence Shares Corporation v. DeckertThird Circuit· 1939-11-11· cited 53×
- State Trust & Savings Bank v. Hermosa Land & Cattle Co.New Mexico Supreme Court· 1925-09-26· cited 52×
- Foster v. HumburgSupreme Court of Kansas· 1956-06-30· cited 50×
- North American Graphite Corp. v. AllanD.C. Circuit· 1950-07-03· cited 48×
- State v. WebsterNevada Supreme Court· 1972-12-26· cited 46×
- Goodman v. PolandD. Maryland· 1975-05-28· cited 38×
- Francis O. Day Co., Inc., a Corporation v. Jacob Shapiro, Usually Known as J. B. ShapiroD.C. Circuit· 1959-05-21· cited 36×
- Schmeck v. City of ShawneeSupreme Court of Kansas· 1982-07-16· cited 36×
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. WulfSupreme Court· 1913-01-13· cited 353×
- Union Pacific Railway Co. v. WylerSupreme Court· 1895-05-20· cited 221×
- Seaboard Air Line Railway v. RennSupreme Court· 1916-05-22· cited 126×
- Hardin v. BoydSupreme Court· 1885-03-16· cited 90×
- Atlantic & Pacific Railroad v. LairdSupreme Court· 1896-11-30· cited 73×
- Washington Railway & Electric Co. v. ScalaSupreme Court· 1917-05-21· cited 25×
Other cases named Friederichsen v. Renard
1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.