Crowne Investments, Inc. v. Bryant

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a fraud action is viable only if the plaintiffs damage is a proximate result of his reasonable reliance upon the defendant's misrepresentation
• explaining that a “guaranteed[-]issue” policy is one offered “regardless of health history”
• summary judgment was proper when \the plaintiffs offered no evidence that Bryant intended to deceive Crowne and Monroeville as to [insurance company's] future performance\ even though Bryant told Crowne and Monroeville that \the insurance was a `guaranteed issue'\
• `[M]ere conclusory allegations or speculation that fact issues exist will not defeat a properly supported summary judgment motion, and bare argument or conjecture does not satisfy the nonmoving party's burden to offer facts or to defeat the motion.'
• `[M]ere conclusory allegations or speculation that fact issues exist will not defeat a properly supported summary judgment motion, and bare argument or conjecture does not satisfy the nonmoving party's burden to offer facts or to defeat the motion.'

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).