Norris v. Crandall

Citations

• 6 Cal. Unrep. 706
• 65 P. 568
• 1901 Cal. LEXIS 1247

Syllabus

<p>Exchange of Property—Fraud.—Where, in an Action to Rescind an exchange, the court found that defendant represented his property as worth $4,000, and believed it worth that, while it was worth only $2,000, the exchange should not be rescinded when the representation was made and relied on as an opinion, and not as a statement of fact.1</p> <p>Exchange of Property—Fraud.—Where Plaintiff Sought to Rescind an exchange of property on the ground of fraud, and the court finds there was no fraud, a failure to find as to all the facts alleged in the complaint is not error.</p> <p>Exchange of Property.—Where, in an Action to Rescind an Exchange of Property, the parties treated the value of the properties exchanged as material, and evidence thereof is admitted over plaintiff’s objection, the judgment should not be reversed, since, if immaterial, it could not prejudice plaintiff.</p> <p>Witness.—Where, on Cross-examination, a Witness was Asked numerous questions as to whether he had not made certain statements to another, but no time, place or circumstances were specified, it was not error to refuse to permit such others to testify as to such statements for the purpose of impeaching such witness.</p> <p>Evidence of Value.—Where a Lawyer Engaged for Twenty Years as an examiner of titles and as attorney for leading loaning companies in a city testifies that he is acquainted with the value of certain lots therein, he should be permitted to testify as to such value.</p>