Jackson v. Seymour
Citation and Court
Jackson v. Seymour, 193 Va. 735 (Va. 1952)
Facts
A brother sold a tract of land to his sister at a price both parties believed was fair for ordinary farmland. Unknown to either party at the time of the sale, the land contained valuable standing timber worth many times the sale price. When the sister discovered the timber’s value, the brother sought rescission of the sale on the ground of mutual mistake.
Issue
Whether a contract for the sale of land may be rescinded when both parties were mutually mistaken about a material fact—the presence of valuable timber—that went to the basic assumption of the transaction.
Holding
The court granted rescission, holding that both parties had shared a mistaken belief about the basic nature and value of what was sold, and enforcement of the contract would be unconscionable given the magnitude of the mistake.
Rule / Doctrine
A contract may be rescinded for mutual mistake when: (1) both parties shared a mistaken belief about a basic assumption of the contract; (2) the mistake materially affects the agreed exchange; and (3) the party seeking relief did not bear the risk of the mistake. Where the mistake goes to the very nature of the subject matter, rescission is appropriate.
Significance
Illustrates rescission for mutual mistake in a land sale context. Useful contrast with Wood v. Boynton, where the court denied rescission despite a similar “unknown value” scenario, highlighting how courts weigh the equities and risk allocation differently depending on the circumstances.