Swank v. Sverdlin

How courts have described this case

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

• holding oral promises not to fire plaintiff, not to take control of AMPS, and not to exercise stock options were promises of future conduct, not existing fact
• “A fact question is raised when there is any dispute in the evidence as to whether a charge in addition to interest is actually for an additional consideration.”
• “To establish negligent misrepresentation, the plaintiff must . . . prove that the defendant misrepresented an ‘existing’ fact in the course of the defendant’s business rather than a promise of future conduct.”
• “A jury must have an evidentiary basis for its findings.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).