Rouse v. United States
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
94 U.S.App.D.C. 386, 215 F.2d 872 (1954)
- Written by Megan Petersen, JD
Facts
Bessie Winston sold her home to John W. Rouse (defendant). In connection with the sale, Rouse agreed “to assume payment of $850” for a heating plant that Winston purchased from Associated Contractors, Inc. At the time Winston purchased the plant, she gave Associated Contractors a promissory note for its cost. The note was guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) (plaintiff). Winston defaulted on the note, which the FHA then paid. The note was assigned to the FHA, which sued Rouse for $850 plus interest. As defenses to the lawsuit, Rouse alleged (1) that Winston had fraudulently misrepresented the heating plant’s condition and (2) that Associated Contractors had installed it incorrectly. The district court struck Rouse’s defenses and granted summary judgment to the FHA. Rouse appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Edgerton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
