History
  • No items yet
midpage
Wright v. Roach
57 Me. 600
Me.
1870
Check Treatment
Daneorth., J.

No question is raised by tbe exceptions but that in relation to damages. The jury were instructed that the damages w'ould be the difference between the actual value of the farm conveyed and the price paid for it.

This is not the measure adopted by the later and better authorities. The true rule, as now settled, is the difference between tbe value of the farm as represented, and the actual value as it was when conveyed. In other words, how much more would the farm have been worth if the several representations made by the defendant, which were proved to be at once false, fraudulent, and material, bad been true. Sedgwick on Dam. (5th ed.) 333, 655, and 658. Stiles v. White, 11 Met. 356.

To such sum may be added as damages a sum equivalent to interest from the time when the conveyance was made. Moulton v, Senter, 39 Maine, 287. Brannin v. Johnson, 19 Maine, 362.

Exceptions sustained.

Appleton, C. J.; Cutting, Kent, Walton, and Tapley, JJ., concurred.

Case Details

Case Name: Wright v. Roach
Court Name: Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Date Published: Jul 1, 1870
Citation: 57 Me. 600
Court Abbreviation: Me.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.