Harding against Freeman.
Mich. 1651. Banc. sup.
HArding brought an Action upon the Case against Freeman, and decla∣red against him,* 1.1 that the Defendant did sell unto him a Gelding, and upon the sale did falsely affirm unto him, that the Gelding was his own Gelding, and that he bred him of a Colt, whereas he bred him not of a Colt, neither was it his own Gelding, but another mans Gelding, and so concludes to his damage. Vpon not guilty pleaded, and a Verdict found for the Plaintif, the Defendant moved in Arrest of Iudgement, 1. That in this sale of the Gelding, the Defendant had made no warranty of him; and therefore though the sale were not good, yet the Action lies not. 2ly. The Plaintif doth not declare that the Defendant knowing the Gelding to be another mans, did affirm him to be his own, and so here doth not ap∣pear to be any fraud in the sale. Twisden answered, that the words are suf∣ficient to imply a disceit, though they express not, that he knowing it to be another mans horse did make that affirmation, for the words are that he did it falso et fraudulenter, and affirmed the Horse to be his own. But the Court stayed the Iudgement, for they said, that here is no direct affir∣mation, but only an intendment that scienter fecit, yet afterwards, judge∣ment was given for the Plaintif.