Unformatted text preview: must need a misrepresentation of a material fact; the opinion in this case is not a material fact. REASON The employee of Arthur Murray was simply trying to consult better business with the company and with costumers. He or she might have needed to require the whole truth. Audrey Vokes herself could have easily continued on with what she has signed up for and make it worthwhile. In a more legal sense, this was neither a unilateral mistake nor a bilateral mistake. By definition, a mistake is where one of the contracting parties was mistaken about a material fact. Also by definition, an opinion is a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. Since the opinion in this situation was not an actionable fact, there was no mistake made. Vokes was misinterpreted by the opinion, not a material fact. Therefore, it was not a fraudulent misrepresentation....
View Full Document
- Spring '10
- Arthur Murray, Arthur Murray Inc, Audrey E. Vokes