Grady v. Jeffares

Citations

• 25 Fla. 743

Syllabus

<p>1. When there is no bill of exceptions in the ca«e, there are not proper data, either as to law or evidence, upon which the court will consider whether there was error in overruling a motion for new trial,</p> <p>2. G. agreed to purchase land of J. J., representing that he had purchased it from one T., and would see that the title was perfect, when in fact J. had not purchased and had no title, which he well knew ; and G. believing J., was induced by the false representation to pay a large sum of money ($1,050), promising to pay the balance in a few days. T. was in possession at the time, and had the title, and there was no offer to deliver to G. It is charged that the representation was wilfull and fraudulent, in order to induce G. to pay said money to J.: Held, That the declaration, fully alleging these facts, in an action to recover damages for deceit, is sufficient, and that the court did not err in overruling the demurrer to it.</p> <p>3. Such a declaration is not defective in not further alleging that the plaintiff had paid, or offered, or was willing to pay the balance called for by the contract, the case not being one for the enforcement of a contract.</p> <p>4. This case distinguished from Sanford vs. Cloud, 17 Fla.</p>