The Northwestern Reporter Volume 84

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1901 edition. Excerpt: ...as undivided profIts. The result was precisely the same as though all the Items had been set out. We know of no law or regulation established by the comptroller of the currency which required the item of interest on rediscounts to appear specifically in the report. The contention that Yates is not liable because Gerner did not specially rely upon him in purchasing stock of Hammond and Lewis is, we think, without merit. The evidence tended to show that the plaintiff relied on the reports and the entire bank directorate. How he could have done this without relying in some measure upon Yates, we are not able to understand. The action is not barred by the statute of limitations. It was an action for relief on the ground of fraud, and the statute did not begin to run until the fraud was discovered. Section 12, Code Civ. Proe. The defendants intentionally conveyed to the public the impression that they had actual knowledge of the facts stated in the reports which they attested. They had no such knowledge, and they were aware of it. By representing as true that of which they were consciously IgnoraD, they committed a fraud, for which they are liable in a common-law action of deceit. A man is guilty of willful falsehood when he asserts as of bis own knowledge a matter of which he knows he Is Ignorant Hexter v. Bast, 125 Pa. St. 52, 17 Atl. 252; Xauman v. Oberle, 90 Mo. 666, 3 S. W. 380; Bullitt v. Farrar, 42 Minn. 8, 43 N. W. 506. 6 L. R. A. 149. Richard C. Outcalt pleaded a discharge Id bankruptcy, but the trial court held that under the facts of this case such a discharge was not a defense. On the authority of Chapman v. Forsyth, 2 How. 202, 11 L. Ed. 230, the ruling is approved. The evidence falling to conclusively establish the correctness of...