Rubens v. Mead

Citations

• 6 Cal. Unrep. 14
• 53 P. 432
• 1898 Cal. LEXIS 1036

Syllabus

<p>■ Broker.—A Broker Who Fraudulently Represented to the principal, whose money he was loaning, that the security was good, is liable, though the principal was’ in a position to have examined the security.</p> <p>Broker.—The Recovery in Action by Principal Against Broker, for fraudulently representing that the worthless property on which loan was made was good security, is not affected by the question whether he shared the money with, or delivered any part of it to, the pretended borrower.</p> <p>Continuance.—There is No Error in Denying Continuance because of defendant’s sickness, there having been a previous continuance on this ground, on stipulation that there should be no further postponement on that ground, and it not appearing that defendant’s presence would have been of any avail.</p>