Salkeld v. V.R. Business Brokers

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a representation, that “virtually no competition” existed for product, was a statement of fact, and not puffing
• reversing trial court's directed verdict based, in part, on finding that defendant's representation that \virtually no competition existed\ for product constituted an opinion or mere puffing
• finding that a marketing plan or system existed where the sales manual detailed product information and sales strategies, stated how to demonstrate the product and mix the drinks, and the company promised support in marketing, training, advertising and promotions
• reversing trial court’s directed verdict based, in part, on finding that defendant’s representation that “virtually no competition existed” for product constituted an opinion or mere puffing
• “Any condition, stipulation, or provision purporting to bind any person acquiring any franchise to waive compliance with any provision of this Act or any other law of this State is void.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).