Washington Supreme Court· 3/30/1967
Sigman v. Stevens-Norton, Inc.
Citations
- 425 P.2d 891
- 70 Wash. 2d 915
- 1967 Wash. LEXIS 1138
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- measuring damages as the difference in the value of the note as represented and its true value
- measuring damages as the difference in the value of the note as represented and its true value
- identifying the elements of a fraud claim, including the fraud 23 victim’s reliance on the truth of the false representation and consequent damage
- explaining one element of fraud is “‘intent that [the fraudulent statement] should be acted on by the person to whom it is made’” (quoting Webster v. L. Romano Eng’g Corp., 178 Wash. 118, 120, 34 P.2d 428 (1934)
- Stevens - quoting Webster v. L. Romano Eng' g Corp., 178 Wash. 118, 120 -21, 34 P. 2d 428 ( 1934)
- in an action for fraud in real estate loan transaction, measure of damages is not restoration of the purchase price, but rather the difference between the value of the security had it been as represented and the actual value of the security received
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Denney
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
39 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Stiley v. BlockWashington Supreme Court· 1996-10-24· cited 226×
- State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court· 1974-10-31· cited 146×
- State v. HardestyWashington Supreme Court· 1996-05-09· cited 113×
- Liebergesell v. EvansWashington Supreme Court· 1980-07-10· cited 105×
- City of Chicago v. Michigan Beach Housing CooperativeAppellate Court of Illinois· 1998-06-10· cited 62×
- Manning v. LoidhamerCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1975-06-30· cited 55×
- Kendrick v. DavisWashington Supreme Court· 1969-03-06· cited 52×
- Kittilson v. FordWashington Supreme Court· 1980-03-20· cited 51×
- First Nationwide Bank v. Gelt Funding, Corp.S.D. New York· 1993-04-09· cited 47×
- Jacqueline's Washington, Inc. v. Mercantile Stores Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1972-06-29· cited 40×
- Reefer Queen Co., Inc. v. MARINE CONSTR. AND DESIGN CO.Washington Supreme Court· 1968-05-02· cited 38×
- Seals v. SealsCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1979-02-14· cited 35×
- Ladley v. Saint Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceWashington Supreme Court· 1968-05-29· cited 31×
- Alexander Myers & Co. v. HopkeWashington Supreme Court· 1977-04-21· cited 29×
- St. Paul Mercury Insurance v. SalovichCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1985-08-27· cited 28×
- First Maryland Leasecorp v. RothsteinCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1993-12-28· cited 27×
- Kittilson v. FordCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1979-05-22· cited 23×
- Rush v. AnestosIdaho Supreme Court· 1983-04-13· cited 22×
- Angelo v. AngeloCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2008-01-18· cited 22×
- Leishman v. Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLCWashington Supreme Court· 2021-01-28· cited 21×
Cites
10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc.Supreme Court· 1946-03-25· cited 1,158×
- Thorndike v. Hesperian Orchards, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1959-08-20· cited 601×
- Gaasland Co. v. Hyak Lumber & Millwork, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1953-06-08· cited 43×
- Wells v. Aetna InsuranceWashington Supreme Court· 1962-12-06· cited 39×
- Boonstra v. Stevens-Norton, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1964-06-18· cited 37×
- Wenzler & Ward Plumbing & Heating Co. v. SellenWashington Supreme Court· 1958-10-30· cited 32×
- Hoke v. Stevens-Norton, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1962-11-01· cited 28×
- Sund v. KeatingWashington Supreme Court· 1953-07-29· cited 21×
- O'BYRNE v. City of SpokaneWashington Supreme Court· 1965-10-14· cited 11×
- Adamec v. McCrayWashington Supreme Court· 1963-11-07· cited 11×
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.