Century Pacific, Inc. v. Hilton Hotels Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that hearsay statements from Rule 30(b)(6) depositions must be supported by admissible evidence to be considered for summary judgment purposes
• stating that a merger clause bars an action for fraud under New York law where it “references a specific subject of prior representations”
• striking exhibit as inadmissible for lack of personal knowledge of defendant’s intent and for lack of relevance
• dismissing plaintiffs negligent misrepresentation because, among other things, plaintiff “failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to a false representation having been made to it that the maker should have known was incorrect”
• “[I]t is appropriate to consider the Motion to Strike prior to the Motion for Summary Judgment.”
• “A present expression of the intent to perform a future act is actionable as fraud only if actually made with a preconceived and undisclosed intention of not performing it.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).