Measure Of Damages For Fraud

15 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Chagas v. Berry
  369 F.2d 637· 5th Cir.· 1966-12-12 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the directed verdict for Atkerson was proper, but the judgment against Chagas must be reversed and remanded for a new trial due to the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on the measure of damages.
• Sade v. N. Natural GAS Co.
  483 F.2d 230· 10th Cir.· 1973-08-14 ·cited 35×
  A fraud claim based on a fraudulently procured release can be maintained without first setting aside the release, and the election of remedies doctrine does not bar the claim if the plaintiff lacked knowledge of the fraud when pursuing prior remedies.
• Birmingham Tr. Nat'l Bank v. Case
  755 F.2d 1474· 11th Cir.· 1985-03-25 ·cited 29×
  Reckless disregard for the truth constitutes a 'false representation' under § 523(a)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code, and the entire debt incurred through such misrepresentation is nondischargeable.
• Steinbauer Assocs., Inc. v. Smith
  599 So. 2d 746· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-06-02 ·cited 13×
  Steinbauer Associates appealed from a denial of its motion for a new trial after a jury found Smith had defrauded Steinbauer but awarded zero damages. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial on damages, holding that the zero-dollar verdict was against the manifest weight
• Kind v. Gittman
  889 So. 2d 87· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-11-10 ·cited 11×
  The Kinds sold an office building to Dr. Gittman for $1.6 million based on representations about long-term leases on the second floor. Dr. Gittman sued for fraud in the inducement after tenants vacated, but the appellate court reversed the jury verdict because he failed to prove
• Fern E. Kalb v. Int'l Resorts, Inc.
  396 So. 2d 199· Fla. 2d DCA· 1981-02-11 ·cited 8×
  International Resorts sued Fern Kalb for fraudulently inducing it to purchase her motel by misrepresenting its 1976 gross income as $150,000 when it was actually $97,565. A jury awarded Resorts $250,000 in damages, but the appellate court reversed the damages award and remanded f
• Srybnik v. ICE Tower, Inc.
  162 So. 2d 294· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-03-03 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the finding of fraud and misrepresentation but reversed the damages awarded, remanding for redetermination of damages. The court also affirmed the decree on the counterclaim.
• Lawton v. Strong
  249 F.2d 299· 6th Cir.· 1957-11-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that using book value instead of market value to calculate damages for misrepresentation of stock value was error.
• Capannelli v. Ellis L. Grane and Alfred S. Kurtz
  266 F.2d 445· D.C. Cir.· 1959-04-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for defendant Grane, as there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that Grane was a party to the conspiracy to defraud the plaintiff.
• P & S Bus. Machs., Inc. v. Olympia U.S.A., Inc.
  707 F.2d 1321· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge erred in granting a directed verdict based on a narrow interpretation of damages and that the jury instructions in the first trial were flawed.
• Shepard v. Cal-Nine Farms
  252 F.2d 884· 9th Cir.· 1958-01-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's method of calculating damages, by awarding the cost of a new well, was a permissible shortcut and supported by precedent.
• United States v. Bound Brook Hosp., Inc.
  251 F.2d 12· 3d Cir.· 1958-01-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the measure of damages for fraud under the Surplus Property Act includes double the amount of pecuniary loss sustained by the United States, calculated as the difference between the price paid by the defendant and the price obtained on resale.
• Dubinsky Realty Co. v. Lortz
  129 F.2d 669· 8th Cir.· 1942-07-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred by submitting a cause of action to the jury that was not pleaded by the plaintiffs and by failing to instruct the jury on all relevant transactions, specifically the exchange of the Palmer property.
• Learjet Corp. v. Spenlinhauer
  901 F.2d 198· 1st Cir.· 1990-04-25
  A purchaser can recover for fraudulent misrepresentation under Kansas law based on indirect reliance on the defendant's misrepresentations made to a third party, even if the purchaser did not directly receive the misrepresentations, provided the purchaser was within the class of
• Thompson v. Am. Power & Light Co.
  192 F.2d 651· 5th Cir.· 1951-11-30
  The court held that the transaction did not fall within the scope of Article 4004, and even if it did, the plaintiffs failed to prove actionable fraud or damages.