Pollock v. DR Horton, Inc.-Portland

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that nondisclosqre amounts to a misrepresentation when the defendant owed the plaintiff a fiduciary, duty, but that the non-disclosure “must relate to something that constitutes a. representation.”
• noting that at times Oregon courts list five elements for fraud, but that there is no substantive difference between the two sets of elements
• “Under Oregon law, proof of fraud generally requires a showing that (1) the accused had falsely represented a material fact; (2) the accused knew that the representation was false; (3
• “Under Oregon law, proof of fraud generally requires a showing that (1) the accused had falsely represented a material fact; (2) the accused knew that the representation was false; (3) the misrepresentation was made with the intent to induce the recipient to act or refrain from acting; (4

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).