Griffin v. Kaufman

Citations

• 110 Kan. 182
• 203 P. 924
• 1922 Kan. LEXIS 1

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Exchange of Property- — False Representation as to Values — Evidence— Findings — Plaintiff Did Not Rely on Representations Made. Where one of the parties to an exchange of property sues the other for damages resulting-from the latter’s false representations exaggerating the value of what he parted with, it is held not to have been prejudicial error to admit evidence-that the property turned in by the plaintiff was not worth the amount at which it was valued in,the trade, in-view of these facts: the petition alleged that to be its value; the jury were instructed not to consider this evidence in determining the amount of damages; special findings were-made that the plaintiff did not rely upon the defendant’s representations and that the trade value of the plaintiff’s property was the amount at which it was taken in the deal.</p> <p>2. Same — Requested Instructions Properly Refused. A requested instruction to the effect that a verdict should be rendered for the plaintiff if certain-misrepresentations were found to have been made was properly refused because it ignored a necessary element of the plaintiff’s case — that of his reliance upon the false statements.</p> <p>3. Same — Assessments to Pay Irrigation Ditch Not An “Incumbrance” on Land Until Due. Where an irrigating ditch is built by the proceeds of' bonds which are to be paid for from assessments against the land benefited in instalments distributed over a term of years, no part of such charge constitutes an incumbrance on the land until by the terms of the statute it becomes due.</p>