## Facts

- Van Bracklin slaughtered a cow and sold the resulting beef to Fonda for household consumption.
- The cow was sick, and the beef was unfit for human consumption.
- Van Bracklin knew the cow was diseased and the meat unwholesome but did not disclose that condition to Fonda.
- Fonda’s household ate the beef and became ill for an extended period.
- Fonda sued Van Bracklin in tort for deceit based on the knowing sale of diseased meat.

## Issues

1. Whether a seller who knows meat is diseased and unwholesome, and who fails to disclose that fact, is liable in deceit for illness caused to the purchaser’s household.
2. Whether the sale of food for consumption carries an implied representation or obligation that the food is wholesome.

## Decision

- The New York Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for Fonda in a per curiam decision.
- The court upheld the jury’s finding that Van Bracklin was liable for selling diseased beef with knowledge of its unwholesome condition and concealing that fact.
- The damages award of $5 was left undisturbed.

## Legal Principles

- A seller who knowingly furnishes unwholesome food for human consumption, while concealing its condition, is liable in damages for resulting injury.
- In actions framed as deceit, the seller’s knowledge of the defect and nondisclosure are central to liability.
- The case is treated as early authority supporting the notion that provisions sold for consumption are expected to be wholesome, a concept later associated with implied warranty in food sales.

## Conclusion

The court sustained liability where the defendant knowingly sold diseased, unfit beef without disclosure and the buyer’s household became ill, affirming a modest jury award and recognizing a duty of honesty and safety in the sale of food for consumption.


Van Bracklin v. Fonda, 12 Johns. 468 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1815)