Summary

Joseph P. Bradley Robertson v. Frank Brothers Company…

If they didn't pay any more than they ought to, transportation or labor charges,-then the verdict is for the defendant.'
Under this charge, of course, the jury, in finding for the plaintiffs, must have found that they acted under constraint-under moral duress-in making the additions for transportation and labor. We do not see how the verdict can be set aside for error in the charge on this point, unless the law be that virtual or moral duress is insufficient to prevent a payment made under its influence from being voluntary.
Source: Wikisource

Joseph P. Bradley Robertson v. Frank Brothers Company…

The ultimate fact, of which that was an ingredient in the particular case, was the moral duress not justified by law. When such duress is exerted under circumstances sufficient to influence the apprehensions and conduct of a prudent business man, payment of money wrongfully induced thereby ought not to be regarded as voluntary. But the circumstances of the case are always to be taken into consideration. When the duress has been exerted by one clothed with official authority, or exercising a public employment, less evidence of compulsion or pressure is required
Source: Wikisource

Joseph P. Bradley Robertson v. Frank Brothers Company…

In our judgment, the payment of money to an official, as in the present case, to avoid an onerous penalty, though the imposition of that penalty might have been illegal, was sufficient to make the payment an involuntary one. It is true that the thing done under compulsion in this case was the insertion of the additional charges upon the entries and invoices; but that necessarily involved the payment of the increased duties caused thereby, and in effect amounts to the same thing as an involuntary payment.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature