Metrocall of Delaware, Inc. v. Continental Cellular Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “to establish fraud it is essential that the defrauded party demonstrates the right to reasonably rely upon the misrepresentation”
• holding that “a written, mutual release memorializing a compromise and settlement may be rescinded for fraud in its procurement”
• recognizing that “some courts label this requirement ‘justifiable reliance’” (quoting Pettinelli v. Danzig, 722 F.2d 706, 709 (11th Cir. 1984))
• recognizing that “some courts label this requirement ‘justifiable reliance’” (quoting Pettinelli v. Danzig, 722 F.2d 706, 709 (11th Cir. 1984))
• holding that proof of reliance in a concealment action requires that the party acted to its detriment in reasonably relying on the assumption that the concealed fact does not exist
• reasoning that \it is unreasonable to rely on the representations of the allegedly dishonest party\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).