Young v. W. S. Badcock Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that plaintiffs alleging a breach of a duty set forth in a statute are entitled to recover in tort
• “[T]he [choice-of-law] provision is not applicable in determining whether plaintiffs have set forth a valid tort claim.”
• choice-of-law provision must state “that any and all claims arising out of the relationship between the parties shall be governed by Florida law” to apply to defenses sounding in tort
• where plaintiffs asserted defendant defrauded them by, among other things, having “fraudulently misrepresented and withheld the actual amount of accounts receivable plaintiffs were entitled to receive,” the complaint set forth a viable tort claim
• where plaintiffs asserted defendant defrauded them by, among other things, having “fraudulently misrepresented and withheld the actual amount of accounts receivable plaintiffs were entitled to receive,” the complaint set forth a viable tort claim
• interpreting language virtually identical to the subject clause

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).