Wood v. Blaney

Citations

• 107 Cal. 291
• 40 P. 428
• 1895 Cal. LEXIS 749

Syllabus

<p>Vendor and Purchaser—Action by Vendor Against Agent—Fraud— Estoppel.—Where a broker or agent employed by the vendors of real estate in the sale of it falsely represented to the vendors that he had received a deposit on account of the sale, when he had in fact taken what proved to be a worthless note, and had full knowledge of the falsity of the statement, of which the vendors were ignorant, and the vendors, relying upon the statement as true, were induced thereby to approve of the contract of sale, the agent is bound to make good his statement, and is estopped from showing its falsity to the injury of the vendors, and the amount of the alleged deposit may be recovered from him as money received for the use of the vendors.</p> <p>Id.—Rescission of Contract—Second Sale by Vendors.—The fact that the contract of sale was rescinded, and that the vendors had sold the same land to third parties, does not render the agent of the vendors who received the deposit of the purchase money an agent of the vendee, or liable to him for the return of the deposit, and does not constitute a defense to the recovery by the vendors from the agent of the deposit which he had professed to have received from the vendee; but the vendee is entitled only as against the vendors to recover back the deposit, less the damage which the vendors had sustained by reason of the breach of the contract, and not as against their agent; and it is immaterial to his liability to pay over the deposit to the vendors, whether or not the vendee is entitled to recover any thing from the vendors, or whether or not the vendors were gainers or losers by the transaction.</p>