Wright v. Roach

Decided July 1, 1870

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1870-07-01

On exceptions to the rulings of Q-oddard, J., of the superior court for the county of Cumberland. Action for alleged deceit in the sale of a farm in Falmouth. There was considerable evidence tending to show fraudulent, misrepresentations as to the quantity and quality of the crops usually raised upon the premises in question, and as to the quality of its soil. The sale and conveyance were made in ^February, 1868, when the place was covered with snow.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1870-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently September 2014

1 district · 3 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Daneorth., J.

¶1No 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.

¶2This 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.

¶3To 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.

¶4Exceptions sustained.

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