Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1899-12-24
COURT DECISIONS.
Notes Of Cases Recently Decided,
Which are Of Interest to
Our People.
DIcEsTEp BY w. B. MARTIN.
Exclusively for virglnian-rilot.,
STRICKLAND ". GRAYB1LL.
Supreme Court of Appeals OF Virginia
November 49, 1899

supreme Court of Appeals OF Virginia.
November 16, 1899.
WHERE A CONTRACT HAS BEEN
PROCURED BY FRAUD OR MIS-
REPRESENTATION AND A PARTY
is SUED AT LAW ON NOTES
MADE IN PURSUANCE OF IT, HE
MAY, UNDER SECTION $3.50 OF
CODE, FILE A PLEA AND SET
OFF HIS DAMAGES AGAINST THE
NOTES.
REQUISITES OF SUCH A PLEA.
THE RENEWAL OF NOTES UNDER
AN UNDERSTANDING WITH
PAYEE THAT He WOULD RE
LEASE THE MAKER FROM TIE
CONTRACT BY WHICH THEY
WE'RE OBTAINED Is NOT A RAT
lFICATION OF SUCH CONTRACT.
The points decided appear from the
opinion of the court.
The court says:
Jonas Graybill executed two notes to
Strickland for the price of a certain
patent, which were from time to time
renewed, and the notes last given not
having been paid, suit was brought to
recover the money represented by them
Inc defendants pleaded general issue
anu special plea, in which they aver
That the notes sued on were given for
the purchase price OF n certain patent
right Tor bed brace for the States Of
ono and Alabama; that the defendants
were induced to purchase by false and
fraudulent representations of material
matters made by the plaintiff 10 them
And that they had been dam
aged to the extent Of S2,750, which they
oifer to set off. against the claim in the
declaration mentioned.
Plaintiff moved 10 strike out this plea
winch the court overrued and the
plaintiff excepted. We are of opinion
that there was no crsor in the ruling
made by tho court. PThe plea AYERS
among other things. that the plaintiff
represented to the defendant that he
had been offered $4,000 for the patent
right This is; an avcrmcnt of fact and
not mere opinion; an averment of q
TACT which might We'll induce Il bidder
to give more for an article than he
otherwise would have done. especially
when The subject Of the purchase is of
n right 10 sell an article and the chief
element of its value is the readiness
with which 1t may be Sold
Nor can the objection to the plea that
1t does not in It's terms aver scienter he
sustained. This Is an equitable plea
under the statute. and contains all the
necessary averments. We have the
positive statements of facts averred to
have been falsely and fraudulently
made for the purpose of procuring the
contract; that they were material; that
they were untrue: that the party to
whom they were made relied upon them
and were by them induced to enter into
the contract
We arc of opinion that the evidence
was sufficient to warrant the Judgment
1t is true that after the original notes
were executed they were renewed with
knowledge on the part of the defend
ants In error of the falsity of the rep
presentations by which they had been in
duced to enter into the contract; but
1T satisfactorily appears that there was
no purpose upon their part to waive the
defence upon which they now rely, or
70 ratify the original transaction, for
Doth the defendants state that the notes
were renewed with the understanding
between them and Strickland that he
expected TO sell the whole patent right
to joint stock company. in which
event he would take back the territory
purchased by them. Affirmed.