Supreme Court of Delaware· 3/11/1982

Norton v. Poplos

Citations

443 A.2d 1
1982 Del. LEXIS 354

How courts have described this case

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

rejecting argument that merger clause prevented a potential buyer of a building from relying on a misrepresentation as to zoning
where the Court described different types of misrepresentations in its consideration of the innocent misrepresentation at issue.
“[T]he equitable remedy of rescission results in abrogation or ‘unmaking’ of an agreement, and attempts to return the parties to the status quo.”
“[T]he equitable remedy of rescission results in abrogation or ‘unmaking’ of an agreement, and attempts to return the parties to the status quo.”
“It is clear, however, that a merger clause does not preclude a claim based upon fraudulent misrepresentations.”
“a statement or assertion . . . may constitute an actionable misrepresentation if it causes a false impression as to the true state of affairs.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Duffy, McNeilly, Quil-Len

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

60 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.