{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Wood v. Boynton - Rule Mistakes are only defenses if they...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Wood v. Boynton 64 Wis. 265 (1885) Fact: Operative Facts: Woman comes into a jewelry store with a stone that looked pretty. She had suspicions that it was topaz and the jewelry store owner, agreed and say, it could be topaz, but she wasn’t sure, based on the color. The store owner then offered a dollar for the stone, and the women didn’t take it, and left. Later, when money was tight, she came back and accepted that offer of $1. And after that, she found out the stone was really a uncut diamond and was worth $1,000. Tried to go back and buy it back for $1.10. But the man refused. Now is a lawsuit arosed. Issue: Whether there was a material mistake at the time the contract was formed.
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Rule: Mistakes are only defenses if they are of material fact, not always basic ass/umption. In the absence of fraud or warranty, the value of a sold item is not grounds for rescission. Rational: Since both of them did not know the true nature of the stone, they could not be held responsible for the mistake, and they were selling a stone. The quality of the stone did not play a part in the determination of the contract or exchange. Holding: The contract remains valid, because contracts cannot be reseeded just for making a bad barging. Synthesis: Dissent/Concurrences:...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online