holding that “although the main ground of the action is fraud or mistake, whereby the defendant has obtained the legal title to the land in controversy, and the chief contention between the parties is with respect to the fraud or mistake alleged . . . the action is in reality for the recovery of real property, and is not barred except by the [period of] limitation” applicable to real property actions
How later courts described this case
- holding that “although the main ground of the action is fraud or mistake, whereby the defendant has obtained the legal title to the land in controversy, and the chief contention between the parties is with respect to the fraud or mistake alleged . . . the action is in reality for the recovery of real property, and is not barred except by the [period of] limitation” applicable to real property actions
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
McFARLAND, J., concurring.
I concur in the judgment of reversal. I do so, however, solely upon the ground that the law on the question involved has been settled by former deeis
*151
ions of this court in accordance with the conclusion reached in the above opinion of Mr. Justice Shaw, and that the rule of
stare decisis
applies strongly to a case where the disturbance of a settled principle would shorten the period of limitation. If the question were an open one, I would be clearly of the opinion that in the case at bar the three-year limitation applies.