Case Name: MOTOR FINANCE & GUARANTY CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Mrs. Kate B. HOWELL, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1925-02-21
Citations: 3 F.2d 1020
Docket Number: No. 4429
Parties: MOTOR FINANCE & GUARANTY CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Mrs. Kate B. HOWELL, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 3
Pages: 1020–1020

Head Matter:
MOTOR FINANCE & GUARANTY CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Mrs. Kate B. HOWELL, Appellee.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
February 21, 1925.)
No. 4429.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Florida; Henry D. Clayton, Judge.
T. M. Shackleford, Jr., of Tampa, Fla., for appellant.
G. E. Ma-bry and Doyle E. Carlton, both of Tampa, Fla. (G. E. Mabry, O. K. Reaves, and D. E. Carlton, all of Tampa, Fla., on the brief), for ap-pellee.
Before WALKER and BRYAN, Circuit Judges, and DAWKINS, District Judge.

Opinion:
DAWKINS, District Judge.
Complainant brought this suit .to rescind her subscription! to the stock of defendant corporation, made-on the 8th and 13th of March, 1922, for $1,500- and $7,500, respectively, upon the ground of fraud and misrepresentation. The fraud alleged consisted in representations made to her by the defendant's stock sales agent that it was a banking and mortgage company, backed by the United States government, and its-stock was guaranteed to pay 20 per cent, dividends, that only $1,500 of the stock could be-sold to any one person, and that this particular stock was on the market because, and only because, some Georgia people, who had previously held it, had become financially embarrassed and forced to sell. The answer was-in substance a general denial. The court below found that practically all of the allegations of fraud and misrepresentation were sustained by the proof and annulled the entire transaction. We have weighed carefully the evidence in the case, and, without finding it necessary to review the same in detail here, are convinced that the conclusions of the trial court, as set forth in its elaborate opinion, are fully sustained both by the facts and the law therein cited. For the reasons assigned, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.