Trial: Dismissal: Grounds: Fraud on Court

1908 Michigan law review  
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the mid--seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non--commercial purposes. Read more about Early Journal
more » ... out Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate--jstor/individuals/early-journal--content. JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not--for--profit organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. RECENT IMPORTANT DECISIONS RECENT IMPORTANT DECISIONS 435 435 Rickmers, 70 Tex. Io8, 7 S. W. 527, as follows: "When the contract of sale is that goods sold shall be paid for with cash, * * * the sale is on condition that the payment be made, and, until this is done, the title to the goods remains in the vendor, notwithstanding they may have come into the possession of the vendee, unless it appears that they were delivered to the purchaser with intent to waive the condition of payment." The rule followed by other courts is to the effect that delivery without exacting payment raises the presumption that the delivery is absolute, and that the vendor has abandoned the security he had provided for the payment of the purchase money, and to have elected to trust the personal responsibility of the vendee. Smith v. Lynes, I Seld. (N. Y.) 41; Farlow v. Ellis, 15 Gray, 229; Hammett v. Linneman, 48 N. Y. 399; Osborn v. Gantz, 60 N. Y. 540; Salomon v. Hathaway, 126 Mass. 482; Seed v. Lord, 66 Me. 580; Martin v. Wirts, ii Ill. App. 567; Mich. Cent. R. Co. v. Phillips, 60 Ill. 90o. Under the facts in the principal case doubtless the same conclusion would have been reached by all courts; whatever the rule might be in their jurisdiction. TRIAL-DISMISSAL-GROUNDS-FRAUD ON COURT.-Plaintiff was seeking to recover a claim against the estate of a deceased person. The county court disallowed the claim, and the plaintiff appealed to the district court. After the trial in the district court had proceeded so far that the cause had been submitted to the jury, the plaintiff was accused of having made a material alteration in an alleged book of accounts of transactions after it had been received as documentary evidence. The district judge, with the aid of a committee of lawyers, made an investigation and became convinced that the accusation was true. He thereupon discharged the jury from further consideration of the case, and dismissed the appeal. Held, fraud or imposition upon the court and against the defendant, practiced by a plaintiff during the progress of the trial, does not justify a dismissal of the action without a determination of its merits. Fitch v. Martin (I907), -Neb. -, 113 N. W.
doi:10.2307/1273857 fatcat:g7jvwqovivcl5mnxcxbt3tvrya