Crist

This suit is one for the rescission of a contract for the purchase of certain residence property, the cancellation of a note and mortgage given as part payment therefor, and the recovery of money paid thereon.

The complaint charged that respondents had falsely and knowingly and with intent to deceive appellants represented that the title to the property was free and clear of all encumbrances of every kind, and that appellants relied upon these representations, whereas there were in fact certain building restrictions against the property. The trial court found that the claimed representations were not made, and judgment went in favor of defendants.

[1] It is first claimed as ground for reversal that this finding on the alleged representations is not supported by the evidence. There was a conflict upon this subject, and the finding is conclusive here.

As a further ground for reversal it is urged that notwithstanding this question, the facts found by the trial court necessitate a reversal of the judgment. These facts, in substance, are as follows: On the twenty-eighth day of August, 1911, the respondents sold to appellants the residence property for the sum' of $6,850, receiving…