Court Opinion

ID: 9767740
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 05:24:43.990002+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:32.689136
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Smith
concurring.
I am not prepared to agree with the analysis of the many cases referred to in the majority opinion. However, I agree with the result reached in this case for the reason that the record shows that the entire transaction, including the statements made by Mr. Kincaid (owner) and Mr. Myers (agent), was one of continuing fraud and in my opinion the findings of the trial court are sufficient to show fraud in the inducement or procurement as well as fraud in the execution of the contract. Under the record in this case, I see no reason for going into the record of the cases such as the Patton case which involved dijerent facts and different pleadings.
It is proper to affirm the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals.
Opinion delivered November 6, 1957.
Rehearing overruled December 18, 1957.