Deputy v. Stapleford & Willis
Before: Baldwin
Synopsis
A deed obtained through' fraud and duress is only voidable, and a bona fide purchaser from the vendee ip such deed, for a valuable consideration, without notice of the fraud or duress, will hold the property.
The Supreme Court will not review the findings of the Court below in an equity cause upon a question of fact, if the party objecting to the finding and appealing does not move for a new trial, and appeal from the order overruling the motion. _
Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court Cope, J. concurring.
It is to be regretted, for the sake of public justice, that the alleged outrage, in which the claim of the plaintiff to the relief he seeks in his bill had its origin, cannot be redressed by a restoration of the property of which he was lawlessly deprived. The deed to Stapleford, though procured by fraud and duress, was only voidable, and the vendee of Stapleford, purchasing in ignorance of the facts, can hold the property. This seems to be the rule supported by the general current of decisions. As no motion for a new trial was made and appealed from, we cannot review the findings upon the question of notice to Mrs. Willis of the plaintiff’s claim or the facts in connection with it, even if on such review, we could disregard the finding of the Judge, and assign conclusive effect to the statement of the plaintiff’s witnesses.
We are compelled reluctantly to affirm the decree.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)