Vokes v - P appealed Ct of app found that generally a...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Vokes v. Arthur Murray, Inc. District Ct of App of FL 2 nd Distict (1968) J. Pierce P 363 FACTS: Plaintiff wanted to be a dancer. D owned a school of dancing. D repeatedly told P that she was getting better and had great promise, but needed more lessons. P spent a total of $31,000 on lessons and never got any better. P sued D for misrepresentation based on the deliberate encouragement made by the D for the sole purpose of making money. Trial Ct. found that there was no misrepresentation of fact and that the lesson contracts were not rescindable on the basis of fraud.
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: P appealed. Ct of app found that generally a misrepresentation had to be based on fact rather than opinion, except where there is a fiduciary relationship b/w the parties or if the parties are not dealing at “arm’s length”. The court found that the D had superior knowledge that he used to take advantage of the P and that he was required to divulge the truth concerning the P’s abilities and potential. ISSUE: Whether a cause of action for misrepresentation may be based on opinion and not solely on fact. HELD: Yes. RULE: see highlight...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 06/15/2009 for the course LAW 577 taught by Professor Staff during the Spring '08 term at Arizona.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online