Case ID: ny-sup-ct_11/html/0665-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Daniels, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CAROLINA OBERLANDER and CHARLES OBERLANDER, Appellants, v. CONSTANTIN ROSSWOG, and another, Respondents.
    This is an appeal from a judgment entered on the report of a referee, dismissing the plaintiffs’ complaint, with costs.
    This action is upon false representations made by the defendants, respecting certain bonds, by which the plaintiffs were induced to accept them as payment in part for real estate sold to the defendants.
    The court, after a very careful examination of the evidence, concluded that the statement of the defendant that “ as far as he knew the bonds were good,” was substantially a statement that they were worth their face, and as he in fact then knew that' they were selling very much below par, that such statement was intended to convey, a false impression, especially as the bonds were assumed, in the arrangement for the sale of the real estate, to represent their par value.
    
      Henry D. Beman, for the appellants.
    
      Stephen H. Olin, for the respondents.
   Opinion by

Daniels, J.

Davis, P. J., and Brady, J., concurred.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, costs to abide event.