Sylvius v. Kosek

Citations

• 117 Pa. 67
• 11 A. 392
• 1887 Pa. LEXIS 236

Syllabus

<p>1. To reform a written contract on the ground of fraud, evidence that it was fraudulently misread to the defendant when he signed it, by a third person to whom it was entrusted merely for the purpose of delivery, is insufficient.</p> <p>2. When a written contract is sought to be impeached by a defence in the nature of a bill brought to reform it on the ground of fraud, the evidence of the fraud, tojustify its submission to the jury without binding instructions, must be clear, precise and indubitable and sustained by two witnesses or by one witness corroborated by circumstances equivalent to another.</p> <p>3. Murray v. Railroad Co., 103 Pa. 37; Phillips v. Meily, 106 Pa. 536; Juniata B. Ass’n v. Hetzel, 103 Pa. 507, followed.</p>