Summary

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Kilbourn v. Sunderland — Opinion of the Court

The point is also pressed that the remedy at law was plain, adequate, and complete, and jurisdiction in equity therefore wanting. We do not understand counsel to repudiate the stipulation, or to suggest multifariousness or any objection arising upon the rather unusual mode pursued to secure a conclusion in four cases rolled into one, but to contend that the determination of all the matters in issue belongs on the law side of the court.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Kilbourn v. Sunderland — Opinion of the Court

Where a party injured by fraud is in ignorance of its existence, the duty to commence proceedings arises only upon discovery, and mere submission to an injury after the act inflicting it is completed cannot generally, and in the absence of other circumstances, take away a right of action, unless such acquiescence continues for the period limited by the statute for the enforcement of such right.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Melville Fuller Melville Fuller Kilbourn v. Sunderland — Opinion of the Court

We hold that the complainants moved with sufficient promptness upon discovering the fraud, and that although, reposing confidence in their agents, they may have neglected availing themselves of some source of of knowledge they might have sought, the defendants cannot be allowed to say that complainants ought to have suspected them, and are chargeable with what they might have found out upon inquiry aroused by such suspicion.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature