Rorer Iron Co. v. Trout
Citations
- 83 Va. 397
- 2 S.E. 713
- 1887 Va. LEXIS 86
Syllabus
<p>1. Fraud&emdash;Rescission&emdash;Facts&emdash;Opinions.&emdash;False representations of material fact constituting inducement to contract, and on which a party has . a right to rely, is ground for rescission in equity. Matter of opinion may amount to affirmation and be inducement to contract, and will be ground for rescission, especially where parties deal not on equal terms, and affirmant has, or is presumed to have, means of information not equally open to the other party.</p> <p>2. Estoppel in Pais.&emdash;Case at bar.&emdash;Estoppel in pais is one that arises from the acts, conduct or declarations of a person, whereby he designedly induces another to alter his position injuriously to himself. But the acts, &c., alleged as such estoppel must be executed, and not merely executory. Case at bar is one where the acts, &c., alleged as an estoppel was held not to be an estoppel.</p> <p>3/ Appellate Court&emdash;Exclusion of evidence.&emdash;Though the chancellor has erroneously excluded evidence, yet if this court upon full consideration of all the evidence, including that excluded, sees no error in the decree0appealed from, it will affirm it.</p> <p>4. Purchasers for value without notice are not affected by latent equities; and grantees from such purchasers stand in the same position as their grantors, although such grantees were affected with notice at the time of the grant.</p> <p>5. IDEM'&emdash;Mode of defense&emdash;Essentials.&emdash;This defense may be made by plea or by answer. But answer, as well as plea, must aver all the essentials of the defense, viz : (1), That they are purchasers for valuable consideration actually paid; (2), that they have received, or are best entitled to receive, conveyance; (3), that their grantor was in possession of the property at the time ; and (4) that these facts happened before notice of the adverse claim. But this defense can not be made unless it is set up by answer or plea.</p> <p>6. Idem&emdash;Notice&emdash;Possessio
Judges: Richardson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
31 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Texas Co. v. DavisTexas Supreme Court· 1923-10-31· cited 94×
- Daughetee v. Ohio Oil Co.Illinois Supreme Court· 1914-04-23· cited 68×
- Huggins v. DaleyFourth Circuit· 1900-02-06· cited 66×
- Bates v. SwigerWest Virginia Supreme Court· 1895-04-06· cited 36×
- Van Gunden v. Virginia Coal & Iron Co.Fourth Circuit· 1892-10-11· cited 32×
- Bluestone Coal Co. v. BellWest Virginia Supreme Court· 1893-11-22· cited 31×
- Williamson v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1942-12-07· cited 30×
- Pace v. RichmondSupreme Court of Virginia· 1986-04-25· cited 27×
- Mills v. HartzSupreme Court of Kansas· 1908-02-08· cited 25×
- Boelk v. NolanOregon Supreme Court· 1910-03-22· cited 19×
- Ford Motor Co. v. SwitzerSupreme Court of Virginia· 1924-11-13· cited 15×
- McDaniel v. HodgesSupreme Court of Virginia· 1940-11-25· cited 13×
- Elk Fork Oil & Gas Co. v. JenningsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of West Virginia· 1898-01-25· cited 13×
- Daughetee v. Ohio Oil Co.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1909-08-05· cited 11×
- Carrothers v. Stanolind Oil and Gas CompanyN.D. Texas· 1955-09-14· cited 10×
- Owen v. WadeSupreme Court of Virginia· 1946-04-22· cited 10×
- Meek v. SpracherSupreme Court of Virginia· 1890-12-04· cited 9×
- Georgeton v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Virginia· 1933-09-21· cited 9×
- Clintwood Coal Corp. v. TurnerSupreme Court of Virginia· 1922-09-21· cited 7×
- Mendota Coal & Coke Co. v. Eastern Ry. & Lumber Co.Ninth Circuit· 1931-10-13· cited 7×
Cites
15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Lamar's Ex'or v. HaleSupreme Court of Virginia· 1884-07-17· cited 56×
- New York Life Insurance v. FlackCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1852-12-15· cited 42×
- Johnson v. ToulminSupreme Court of Alabama· 1850-06-15· cited 32×
- Russell v. LytleNew York Supreme Court· 1831-01-15· cited 30×
- Lowe v. TrundleSupreme Court of Virginia· 1883-11-22· cited 29×
- Grim v. ByrdSupreme Court of Virginia· 1879-10-13· cited 26×
- Mitchell v. HawleyNew York Supreme Court· 1847-05-15· cited 17×
- Gibson v. GibsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1818-03-15· cited 17×
- Whitney v. HolmesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1818-05-15· cited 16×
- Brown v. Rice's adm'rSupreme Court of Virginia· 1875-09-16· cited 16×
- Linhart v. Foreman's Adm'rSupreme Court of Virginia· 1883-05-03· cited 16×
- Moore v. ClaySupreme Court of Alabama· 1845-01-15· cited 15×
- McMullin's Adm'r v. SandersSupreme Court of Virginia· 1884-08-14· cited 13×
- Wood v. KrebbsSupreme Court of Virginia· 1878-09-15· cited 11×
- Hull v. Fields & ThomasSupreme Court of Virginia· 1882-08-07· cited 9×
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.