Morley

Bell v. Morley

Good Law
139 C.C.A. 174·223 F. 628·1915 U.S. App. LEXIS 1769
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 24, 1915No. 2573California677 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Rudkin, J.

This is an appeal by the defendants from a decree foreclosing a purchase-money mortgage on certain timber lauds in the state of Washington. The answer.contains two defenses, or partial defenses: The first is that the agent who acted for the appellees in the sale of the property to the appellants for the purpose of inducing the appellants to make the purchase represented that the firm of Janies D. Lacey & Co., with whom he was connected, had carefully and accurately cruised the property; that thefe was on the property as shown by such cruise, exclusive of .hemlock, 11,584,000 feet, board measure, of good merchantable timber, that the appellants purchased the property relying on these representations; that in truth and in fact there was upon the property only 7,916,919 feet of merchantable timber, exclusive of hemlock, and that the appellants were damaged thereby in the sum of $9,167.57. As a further partial defense it was averred that the title to 40 acres of the timber land had failed to the damage of the appellants in the sum of $2,500. The court below overruled both of those defenses, and upon these rulings the assignments of error are based.

[1] It is a sufficient answer to…

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.