A misrepresentation of law is not ordinarily treated as technical fraud.1

6 Kelly v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 138 la. 273, 114 N. W. 536.

7 Sprinkle v. Wellborn, 140 N. Car. 163, 52 S. E. 666; Burch v. Scott, 168 N. Car. 602, 84 S. E. 1035.

8 Burch v. Scott, 168 N. Car. 602, 84 S. E. 1035.

11ndiana. Ashmead v. Reynolds, 134 Ind. 139, 39 Am. St. Rep. 238, 33 N. E. 763.

Iowa. Clough v. Adams, 71 la. 17, 32 N. W. 10.

Nebraska. Bennett v. Bennett, 65 Neb. 432, 91 N. W. 409, 96 N. W. 994.

New Jersey. Mott v. Molt, 49 N. J. Eq. 192, 22 Atl. 997.

Utah. Church of J. C. L. D. S. v. Watson, 25 Utah 45, 69 Pac. 531.

Wisconsin. Horton v. Lee, 106 Wis. 439, 82 N. W. 360.

2 Horton v. Lee, 106 Wis. 439, 82 N. W. 360.

3Church of J. C. L. D. S. v. Watson, 25 Utah 45, 69 Pac. 531. (Even if the grantee gives to such wife a lease for years at one dollar a year.)

4 Menz v. Beebe, 102 Wis. 342, 77 N. W. 913 [modified on rehearing, 102 Wis. 350, 78 N. W. 601].

5 Worthington v. Major, 94 Mich. 325, 54 N. W. 303; Kroenung v. Goehri, 112 Mo. 641, 20 S. W. 661; Konrad v. Zimmermann, 79 Wis. 306, 48 N. W. 368.

6Kroenung v. Goehri, 112 Mo. 641, 20 S. W. 661.

7 Hick v. Thomas, 90 Cal. 289, 27 Pac. 208, 376. 1 See ch. XI.

However, a misrepresentation of law may be so combined with the exercise of influence over the party seeking relief, as to establish the fact of undue influence.2 Thus a misrepresentation of law, even if innocent, as that a lease for life to take effect in the future, is void, the lessee being thus induced to compromise for a sum far less than her interest in her father's estate;3 or that a wife could not collect insurance in her favor on her husband's life unless she gave her note for his debt,4 may in connection with facts of undue influence make the transaction voidable.