Bank of Montreal v. Signet Bank, Bank of Montreal v. Signet Bank

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that fraud by concealment requires actual intent to conceal a fact from the other party, and reckless nondisclosure is not actionable
• recognizing that a duty to disclose may arise if “the fact is material and the one concealing has superior knowledge and knows the other is acting upon the assumption that the fact does not exist”
• noting that “employer is not liable under Title VII when accommodating an employee's religious beliefs would require the employer to violate federal or state law”
• noting that “concealment requires a showing of intent to conceal a material fact; reckless nondisclosure is not actionable” (citations omitted)
• stating that a failure to disclose information is generally not actionable as fraudulent concealment where the parties are engaging in an arm’s length transaction
• stating that “[i]n all cases of fraud [under Virginia law] the plaintiff must prove that it acted to its detriment in actual and justifiable reliance on the defendant’s misrepresentation (or on the assumption that the concealed fact does not exist)”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).