Comer v. Granniss
| Decision Date | 31 October 1885 |
| Parties | Comer. vs. Granniss. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Fraud. Vendor and Purchaser. Value. Equity. Laches. Contracts. Before Judge Simmons. Bibb Superior Court. April Term, 1885.
Reported in the decision.
H. B. Tompkins; Bacon & Rutherford, for plaintiff in error.
R. F. Lyon, for defendant.
When this case was before this court, as reported in 55 Ga., 147, this court held that the allegations in the bill made such a prima facie case of fraud as required the overruling a demurrer thereto. The bill alleged that Gran-niss fraudulently Concealed from Hanson, the agent of the plaintiff, the real value of the stock, knowing that Hanson was ignorant thereof; also that Hanson reposed special trust and confidence in Granniss. These are the main allegations in the bill as to fraud. The facts are, that Mr. Comer, who lived in Savannah, and who was well acquainted with the value of the stock of the Southern Insurance and Trust Company, a company located in Savannah, met Mr. Hanson in Macon, and instructed him to purchase for the plaintiff one thousand shares of the stock in this company at one dollar and fifty cents or one dollar and seventy-five cents per share. Mr. Hanson, the agent, knowing that Granniss was the agent of this company in Macon, approached him and desired to know where ho could purchase one thousand shares of the stock of this com-pany; Granniss inquired what he was willing to pay. Hanson agreed to pay $1.50 for each dollar of the capital stock paid in, the same being two dollars and fifty cents on each share of ten dollars, —the amount agreed to be paid being three dollars and seventy-five cents on each share. The market value thereof was not over two dollars per share. Granniss agreed to furnish the stock, which he did, and Hanson paid him therefor thirty-seven hundred and fifty dollars for the one thousand shares. Hanson says that he purchased this stock as he would a lot of cotton in the market. A few days thereafter, Hanson discovered his mistake in regard to his instructions; that he had paid three dollars and seventy-five cents per share, when he was instructed not to pay more than one dollar and seventy-five cents per share. He and Comer applied to Granniss to give up his bargain and rescind, the one offering five hundred and the othertwo hundred dollars to induce him to do so. Granniss refused.
How does it appear that Granniss concealed from Hanson the real value of this stock? No in quiries were made by Hanson of him in regard to its value. And how is it made to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Norton v. Bohart
... ... Kansas City, 80 Mo. 231; ... Fruin v. Railroad, 89 Mo. 397; Treadway v. Johnson, ... supra; Schouler on Personal Prop., pp. 626-628; Comer v ... Grannis, 75 Ga. 277; Brown v. Mosher, 33 N.W ... 38. (3) If a party, through ignorance, forgetfulness, ... inadvertence or mistake, ... ...
-
Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Gortatowsky
... ... Code of 1895); Keith v. Brewster, 114 Ga. 176, 39 ... S.E. 850; Atlanta Trust & Banking Co. v. Nelms, 116 ... Ga. 915, 923, 43 S.E. 380; Comer v. Granniss, 75 Ga ... 277 (in which case rescission of an executed contract was ... denied); Du Bignon v. Mayor, 106 Ga. 317, 32 S.E ... 102; ... ...
-
Cent. Of Ga. Ry. Co v. Gortatowsky
...Keith v. Brewster, 114 Ga. 176, 39 S. E. 850; Atlanta Trust & Banking Co. v. Nelms, 116 Ga. 915, 923, 43 S. E. 380; Comer v. Granniss, 75 Ga. 277 (in which case rescission of an executed contract was denied); Du Bignon v. Mayor, 106 Ga. 317, 32 S. E. 102; Dyar v. Walton, 79 Ga. 466, 7 S. E.......
-
Luecke & Cohen
...v. Mill Co., 77 Mo.App. 672; Maybray v. Shoe Co., 73 Mo.App. 1; 31 Cyc. 1356, and note; Dry Goods Co. v. Mfg. Co., 119 Ga. 124; Connor v. Granniss, 75 Ga. 277; Grocer Co. Russell, 65 Ill.App. 281; School Furniture Co. v. Board of Education, 18 Ky. L. Rep. 948; Daylight Burner Co. v. Odlin, ......