Singer v. Guy Investment Co.

Citations

• 60 Wash. 674
• 111 P. 886
• 1910 Wash. LEXIS 1120

Syllabus

<p>Vendor and Purchaser — Rescission by Vendee — Fraud op Agent —Evidence op Relation — Suppiciency. In an action by vendees to recover earnest money, paid upon representations of the alleged agent of the vendor, the evidence sufficiently shows that such agent was the agent of the vendees where the agent testified that he was representing the vendees, who did not deny the same, and the agent in a letter objected to defects shown by the abstract.</p> <p>Principal and Agent — Existence op Relation — Evidence op Agent. The declarations of an agent as to whom he represented are competent where they form part of his testimony in the ease.</p> <p>Vendor and Purchaser — Rescission by Vendee — Fraud—Evidence — Admissibility. In an action to recover earnest money, paid on false representations by and through certain maps that lots were contiguous, it is not error to sustain an objection to a question as to where plaintiffs’ agent got the maps, where no offer was made to show that the maps did not come from the defendant or its agents and it appears that they did not.</p> <p>Same — Defects in Title — Abstract. In .an action to rescind a sale for defects in the title, an objection that the abstract does not show whether a certain grantee in the chain was married or single is unavailing where such grantee made affidavit that she was a widow when she received the title.</p> <p>Same. Upon objection to an abstract upon one specified ground, other grounds are waived.</p>