264 FEDERAL REPORTER. �the auctioneer, intentloiially or otliorwlse, mislcd tlio bidders asto the time when the sale would t.ikeplAce; or wlien, under any other circumstaiices, proposed bidders, without any negli- gence of their own, are prevented from attending the sale." I see no reason why this course may not be properly pur- sued in the case. While the assignee did not intentionally mislead the purchaser, the notice of sale would naturally lead a personto suppose that the property was to be sold subject to a certain lien and to that lien only, and the complainants in this case were in ail probability misled by it. �It seems to me that substantial justice will be done by granting the complainants adecree setting aside the sale, and subrogating them to the rights of Hardin, the purchaser under the execution sale. The proper course will then be for Hardesty and wife to petition the bankrupt court for thoir ex- emption. This question being determined, the assignee will know exactly what he is to sell, and the purchaser what he proposes to buy. I express no opinion in this case as to whether, in faet, Hardesty and wife are entitled to the home- sfcead claimed by them. �A decree will be entered in accordance with this opinion. ���Elfelt V. Habt. �{Circuit Court, B. Minnesota. Pebruary, 1880.) �CoNTBACT — Fkaud — Eqtjitalb Kei,tef. — It is not always necessary for the injured party, even whon fraud taints the coniract, to rescinil it ta order to resist its full operation. He may permit the contract to be amended so as to conform to fair dca'ing, and if, under the pleadings and the relief prayed, a court of chancery can enter a decree which would be just and fair, and in accordance with equity, it will do so. �Action removed from state court, and heard, without change of pleadings, by cousent. �Gilman e Clough, for plaintiff, �Smith e Egan, for defendant. �Nelson, J. The plaintiff brings this action to compel the ��� �
