Skip to main content
· 7/23/2002

McConkey v. Aon Corp.

Citations

  • 804 A.2d 572
  • 354 N.J. Super. 25

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that pecuniary damages are essential to a fraudulent misrepresentation cause of action
  • holding that pecuniary damages are essential to a fraudulent misrepresentation cause of action
  • holding that pecuniary damages are essential to a fraudulent misrepresentation cause of action
  • holding that pecuniary damages are essential to a fraudulent misrepresentation cause of action
  • adopting, with some editing, the Commission’s analysis why its procedures did not violate the judges’ right to procedural due process
  • finding that Plaintiff’s fraud claim was not barred by the parole evidence rule because it was “not a case where the contract provisions contradicted oral assurances on the same subject, thereby nullifying all prior oral and written agreements between the parties.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Judges Eichen, Lintner and Parker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.