Greenberg v. Tomlin

How courts have described this case

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

• “It is generally recognized... that the elements of fraud and fraudulent misrepresentation are essentially identical.”
• “both the pleadings and the record reveal that the foundation for the Plaintiffs’ Section 1962(d) claims is the alleged conspiracy between [individual Defendants] and the corporate defendant”
• “[I]t is equally clear that a promise to do something in the future and the failure to keep that promise, is not fraud.” (internal citations omitted)
• When a contract is induced by fraud the injured party has a choice of alternate remedies he may either rescind the contract or affirm it and maintain an action in deceit for damages
• ”[A]n exception to the rule exists [under Pennsylvania law] when the party seeking to enforce the agreement as written has made admissions that the agreement does not, in fact, constitute the entire agreement between the parties even when it contains an integration clause.”
• degree of sophistication and business history are relevant factors in determining reasonableness

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).