Wainscott

Wainscott v. Occidental Building & Loan Ass'n

Good Law
1893 Cal. LEXIS 901·98 Cal. 253·33 P. 88
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 12, 189318092California1,647 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Seakls, J.

This is an action for the rescission of certain conveyances and instruments connected therewith, growing out of an exchange of property owned by plaintiff in the county of Placer, for a tract of land with vineyard thereon, etc., owned by defendant, situated at Sonoma in the county of Sonoma. The action is based upon false and fraudulent representations of defendant and its agents, whereby plaintiff is averred to have been defrauded. Plaintiff had judgment, from which and from an order denying a new trial defendant prosecutes an appeal. The first point made by appellant is that the complaint does not *255 allege, and the court does not find, that the plaintiff was damaged, and hence that the findings do not support the judgmeut. In view of the doctrine enunciated by elementary writers, and fully concurred in by the courts of probably every state of the union, it will be readily admitted on all hands that “courts of justice do not act as mere tribunals of conscience to enforce duties which are purely moral, and involving no pecuniary or tangible injury. Falsehood, fraud, and deceit are not to be commended, but so long as their practice only involves a question of morals, the duty of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.