Epperson v. Roloff

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that liability for fraud can rest on communication of misinformation to an agent, with reason to expect that the agent will communicate that misinformation to third parties
• explaining that omissions 5 generally do not support misrepresentation claims
• noting the “general rule” that “an action in deceit will not lie for nondisclosure”
• rejecting the argument that an integration clause barred a misrepresentation claim
• “[W]here the defendant alone has knowledge of material facts which are not accessible to the plaintiff . . . . there is a duty of disclosure.”
• whether party had notice of defect in home was question for jury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).