Hanna v. Rayburn

Citations

• 84 Ill. 533

Syllabus

<p>1. Pbaud—evidence of complicity in false letters. The fact that no one else but the owner of Kansas lands, which he trades for other land, could have any interest in the writing of letters making offers to purchase the Kansas land at more than its real value, which are shown to the other party, does not furnish a legal inference of such other party’s complicity in procuring such letters, although it may appear the letters were fictitious. It is not sufficient evidence of his commission of a fraudulent act that it was for his interest, and that of no one else, to have the act done.</p> <p>2. Same —party must rely on fraudulent assurances. A party receiving Kansas lands in exchange, can not be allowed to rescind the trade from the fact of fictitious letters having been addressed to a former owner of the lands, offering to purchase the same at a price in excess of their value, when he is the active party in urging the contract, and the proof shows that he did not rely upon such letters, but rather upon the statements of disinterested persons.</p>