Wortley v. Camplin

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a jury could reasonably conclude that a contractual promise was fraudulently made where the promisor never intended to keep the promise and the promisee had made it clear to the promisor that such a promise was indispensable to the agreement
• “Maine law does not impose a duty of good faith and fair dealing except in circumstances governed by specific provisions of the U.C.C.”
• \Proximate causation and intervening cause are usually issues for the jury to resolve.\
• \Proximate causation and intervening cause are usually issues for the jury to resolve.\
• “When the defendant makes a specific promise, as part of the consideration for the transfer of securities, to perform an act, while intending not to perform the act, this may constitute a basis for a fraud finding.”
• “When there has ben a violation of Section 10-b, the ordinary measure of damages is for a defrauded seller to recover the difference between what the seller received for the shares and the fair market value of the shares at the time of the sale”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).