MURRAY RUBENS AND MYRNA RUBENS, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
MICHAEL GLINSKY, REBECCA GLINSKY, HIS WIFE, 163RD STREET REALTY, INC. AND BELLE YANTZ, INC., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Reliance On Misrepresentation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The dismissal of the Rubenses’ complaint with regard to their fraudulent misrepresentation count is reversed. The complaint, while not a model of craftsmanship, adequately alleges the elements of a cause of action for fraudulent misrepresentation by alleging: (a) the misrepresentation of a material fact (the concealment of a negative roof inspection report and the presentation of a favorable one so as to represent that the roof was in good condition); (b) that the defendants knew the falsity of the representation; (c) that the defendants made the representation intending that the plaintiffs would rely on it in purchasing the house; (d) that the plaintiffs did rely on the representation in purchasing the house; and (e) that the plaintiffs reliance caused damage. See American International Land Corp. v. Hanna, 323 So. 2d 567, 569 (Fla.1975); Johnson v. Davis, 449 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); see also Besett v. Basnett, 389 So. 2d 995 (Fla.1980). With regard to the other count in the complaint, the order is affirmed.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gordon v. Etue, Wardlaw & Co., P.A., 511 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…, made with the knowledge of its falsity and an intent to induce reliance. See Raymond, James & Associates v. Zumstorchen Investment, Ltd., 488 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Schryburt v. Olesen, 475 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Rubens v. Glinsky, 473 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). For example, in Peninsular Florida District Council of Assemblies of God v. Pan American Investment and Development Corp., 450 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), a complaint [*391] was held to have satisfied the particularity-test…
-
Assad v. Mendell, 511 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…the representation intending that the plaintiffs would rely on it in purchasing the house; (d) that the plaintiffs did rely on the representation in purchasing the house; and (e) that the plaintiff’s [sic] reliance caused damage.” Rubens v. Glinsky, 473 So. 2d 20, 20 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); see also Johnson v. Davis, 480 So. 2d 625, 627 (Fla.1985); American Int’l Land Corp. v. Hanna, 323 So. 2d 567, 569 (Fla.1975). Additionally, “[p]unitive damages are recoverable where the tortious act complained of is fraud.”…
Authorities Cited
- Besett v. Basnett, 389 So. 2d 995 (Fla. 1980)
- Am. Int'l Land Corp. v. Hanna, 323 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1975)
- Johnson v. Morton Davis and Esther Davis, 449 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)