Ballou v. Lucas

• Court: Iowa Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: BECK, J.
• Citation: Ballou v. Lucas, 59 Iowa 22, 12 N.W. 745 (Iowa 1882)
• Decision Date: 14 June 1882
• Parties: BALLOU v. LUCAS, ADM'X, ET AL

12 N.W. 745

59 Iowa 22

BALLOU v. LUCAS, ADM'X, ET AL

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

June 14, 1882

Appeal from Marshall District Court.

ACTION in chancery to rescind a sale and conveyance of forty acres of land in Marshall county on account of fraudulent representations as to the title made by defendant to plaintiff. There was a decree granting the relief prayed for in the petition; defendant appeals. After the cause was brought to this court the death of Lucas was suggested and his administratrix was substituted as defendant.

AFFIRMED.

J. M Parker, for appellant.

L. L Hamlin and Caswell & Meeker, for appellee.

OPINION

BECK J.

I.

The petition alleges that defendant, for the purpose of defrauding plaintiff, represented to him that defendant was the absolute owner, under a good and perfect title, of the land involved in this suit; that plaintiff, relying upon defendant's representations, as to his title to the land, entered into a contract with defendant for its purchase, and in pursuance thereof and in payment for the land, conveyed to defendant a lot in the city of Marshalltown and paid him $ 200.00 in money, and received from defendant a quit-claim deed for the land, and that defendant had no right, title or interest in and to the land, which was well known to him. The plaintiff offers to reconvey the land to defendant by quit-claim deed, and prays that a decree be entered requiring defendant to reconvey the lot to plaintiff and that judgment be rendered in his favor against the defendant for $ 200.00, being the amount paid in money upon the purchase of the land.

The answer of defendant denies the averments of the petition as to the alleged representations made by defendant regarding the title, and charges that plaintiff made examinations into the title and had full opportunity to protect himself against the alleged fraud of defendant, and relied upon his own judgment and knowledge in making the purchase. The defendant further alleges that prior to and at the time of the sale of the land he informed the defendant that his title to the land was based upon a sheriff's deed and that he would execute therefor a conveyance of no other character than a quit-claim deed.

II. The evidence we think supports the allegations of plaintiff's petition. It is satisfactorily shown that defendant represented to the agent through whom the sale was made that the title of the land was good, and also stated that he had or did have an abstract so showing. The representations in regard to the title were repeated to plaintiff by the agent, but it does not appear that the agent informed plaintiff that defendant claimed to have an abstract of title. The plaintiff made no examination of the title and we are well satisfied by the evidence that he relied upon defendant's representations that the title was good, and was influenced thereby to make the purchase.

The testimony clearly shows that defendant's title to the land was not good; that he claimed under a sheriff's deed executed upon a sale under a foreclosure of a mortgage. The title to a large interest in the land was in minor heirs who did not join in the execution of the mortgage, and their interest was in no manner and to no extent bound by it. Besides the land was covered by a prior mortgage, executed by the mother of the heirs, who had executed the mortgage under which defendant claimed. This prior mortgage had been foreclosed and a part of...