Tenzer v. Superscope, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that plaintiff must establish that defendant lacked intent to honor its contractual promises when made to succeed on a fraudulent inducement claim
• holding \proof that a promise was 13 made and that it was not fulfilled\ is insufficient to establish fraud
• identifying “hasty repudiation of the promise” 27 as one kind of circumstantial evidence that can support promissory fraud claims
• “[S]omething more than nonperformance is required to prove the defendant’s intent not to perform his promise.” (quoting People v. Ashley, 42 Cal.2d 246, 263 (1954)) (inter- nal citations omitted)
• action for fraud maintainable even when the allegedly fraudulent promise is unenforceable as a contract due to statute of frauds
• “ ‘[Something more than nonperformance is required to prove the defendant’s intent not to perform his promise.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).