Wainscott v. Occidental Building & Loan Ass'n

Fraud—Damage —False Representations—Appreciable Injury. — Courts of justice do not act as mere tribunals of conscience to enforce purely moral duties which involve no pecuniary or tangible injury; but when false representations are made use of to accomplish a fraudulent purpose, as against those having a right to rely upon their truthfulness, and who do so rely, and are thereby deceived and injured, the courts will intervene to redress the wrong and injury, and if any pecuniary loss is shown to have resulted, the court will not inquire into the extent of the injury, but it is sufficient if the party misled has been very slightly prejudiced, if the amount is at all appreciable.

Id.—Rescission fob Fraud—Damage. — In an action to rescind, upon the ground of fraud, the fraud is the essential thing, and while it must be coupled with loss, injury, or damage, the precise amount of the damage is of secondary importance.

Id.—Exchange of Property—Misrepresentations—Condition and Value of Vineyard—Pleading—Findings. — In an action for the rescission of certain conveyances and instruments connected therewith, growing out of an exchange of property, where the complaint does not contain the word “ damage,” but the findings, which follow substantially the allegations of the complaint, show that the agent of the defendant represented to the plaintiff that the tract sold contained a greater number of acres than it actually did contain; that a portion of the land was planted with grape vines, which yielded an average of eight tons to the acre; that the vines were healthy and free from disease, and that the place had yielded an average income for ten years of two thousand two hundred dollars per year net, whereas the truth was that the vineyard had not produced more than eighteen to twenty tons of grapes per annum for many years ; that the vines were diseased and three fourths of them were dead, and the gross yearly income for the last five or six years had gradually decreased from one thousand dollars to six hundred dollars, which was a little more than the expense of cultivation, and that the whole vineyard was practically valueless, and that such representations were made with intent to deceive, and were relied upon by the plaintiff, sufficient injury is shown to warrant a rescission of the contract.

Id.—Personal Inspection of Land by Purchaser—Artifice of Vendor to Prevent Investigation—Presumption. — The general rule that no matter what representations are made in reference to the character and value of land by a vendor, if the purchaser visit the property itself, prior to the sale, and makes a personal examination of it touching those representations, he will be presumed to rely, not upon the representations, but upon his own judgment in making the purchase, does not apply to a case where the vendor by artifice prevents the investigation from being as full as the purchaser desires to make it.