Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

AUGUST HENKELS et al., complainants-respondents, v. PYRAMID BOND ANDMORTGAGE CORPORATION et al., defendants-appellants.WILLIAM P. AMEND et al., complainants-respondents,

PER CURIAM.

These are fact cases. Each complainant sought rescission of his subscription to stock of defendant Pyramid Bond and Mortgage Corporation on the allegations that he was induced to purchase the stock on sundry misrepresentations of the defendant through its agents, servants and employes. Defendant answered below, and argues here, that (1) there was no fraud; (2) assuming there was fraud respondents by their acts ratified their contracts; and (3) that assuming there was fraud, as found by the vice-chancellor, respondents did not act with the promptness required in cases of rescission.

We find no merit in appellant's contentions. For, we have carefully examined the proofs and are satisfied that they fully support the result reached by the learned vice-chancellor in each case.

The decrees are affirmed, with costs.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, HEHER, PERSKIE, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, JJ. 11.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HENKELS v. PYRAMID BOND MORTGAGE CORP
(Oct 2, 1936)