Field v. Stubblefield

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a defendant’s inclusion of incorrect opinions of value in a financial statement submitted as part of divorce proceeding was fraudulent
• “Having alleged fraud, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant made a fraudulent representation for the purpose or with the intention of causing the plaintiff to act upon it.” (quotation omitted)
• noting the defendant’s intentional withholding of his newest financial statement — showing a significant increase in the value of his assets — and his “eleventh hour refusal to warrant the reliability of his financial information”
• decided under former Superior Court Rule 158

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).