Some very interesting stuff on Fraud!

Posted by computerguy (204.180.131.3) on December 19, 2003 at 08:33:22:

FRAUD
It is a settled matter of over two hundred years that fraud is actionable at the common law. This was established in England prior to the writing of the seventh amendment. See Pasley v. Freeman. (1789), 12 R.C. 235 (3 T.R. 51, 1 R.R. 635) where it was firmly established that an action might be maintained for a fraudulent misrepresentation as an independent cause of action.

Pasley, supra, is cited in 1 Bigelow on Fraud, p. 466, with the remark: “This has been the law in actions for damages for a hundred years.” “It dates from Pasley v. Freeman.” Ibid., p.536.

Additionally, “It is not necessary that the misrepresentation complained of should have been made with a corrupt motive of personal gain on the part of the person making the representation.” 1 Bigelow on Fraud, p. 536, citing Pasley v. Freeman, (1789).

See also Biggs v. Lawrence (1789), 3 Term. Rep. 454, and Pawson v. Watson (1778), 2 Cowp. 785, 788

In Ruling Cases (of the English Common Law) Part L (Equitable Jurisdiction), (iii) Extensions of Fraud, section 14., we find that equity was extended to include the heading of “constructive fraud” as well. See Aleyn v. Belcher (1758) 1 Eden, 132; 2 White and Tud. L.C. 7th ed., 308 %

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup