California Codes
Cal. Civil Code § 1709 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov
JustiaCode on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
One who willfully deceives another with intent to induce him to alter his position to his injury or risk, is liable for any damage which he thereby suffers.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 230
cases (46 in the last 5 years), 1944–2026 · leading case: Mirkin v. Wasserman, 858 P.2d 568 (Cal. 1993).
Mirkin v. Wasserman, 858 P.2d 568 (Cal. 1993). “" However, like much of our law, the law of deceit in California is not purely statutory; it is a mixture of statutory and common law.”
Von Grabe v. Sprint PCS, 312 F. Supp. 2d 1285 (S.D. Cal. 2003). “Fraud Under Civil Code § 1709 17 In counts one through four and eleven, Plaintiff further alleges fraudulent *MCCCXLVII acts on behalf of Defendant, seeking damages under California Civil Code § 1709. 18 These alleged acts include: advertising with intent not to sell as…”
Lazar v. Superior Court, 909 P.2d 981 (Cal. 1996). “778; Civ. Code, § 1709; and Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.”
Applied Equip. Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd., 869 P.2d 454 (Cal. 1994). “" (Civ. Code, § 1709.) We do not suggest that the doctrine of conspiracy cannot impose tort liability on a contracting party for fraud or other torts for which that party could, in the absence of a conspiracy, be held liable to a plaintiff.”
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of San Francisco Cnty., 377 P.3d 874 (Cal. 2016). “2 concealment (Civ. Code, §§ 1709, 1710); negligent misrepresentation; fraud by concealment; unfair competition (Bus.”
In re Yahoo! Inc. Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig., 313 F. Supp. 3d 1113 (N.D. Cal. 2018). “Rather, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants committed deceit by concealment under California Civil Code § 1709 by violating the duty to disclose.”
Roussos v. Michaelides (In Re Roussos), 251 B.R. 86 (9th Cir. BAP 2000). “" Cal.Civ.Code § 1709. To prevent a double recovery for the breach of fiduciary duty as well as the fraud count, the appellee's counsel proposed that the same damages should apply *90 to both phases, as well as to all theories of recovery.”
Wilson v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 668 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2012). “” Cal. Civ.Code § 1709. 7 . Plaintiff argues that the present case is distinguishable from Baba , since in Baba the court found that the complaint failed because there were "no averments that HP knew of the alleged defects at the time it sold the computers.”
Fladeboe v. Am. Isuzu Motors Inc., 58 Cal. Rptr. 3d 225 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). “87 in damages on its claims for fraud and negligent misrepresentation against Fladeboe and Fladeboe AG.”
Oakland Raiders v. Oakland-Alameda Cnty. Coliseum, Inc., 2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10620 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006). “While intentional fraud requires the intent to deceive (Civ.Code, § 1709), negligent misrepresentation encompasses "[t]he assertion, as a fact, of that which is not true, by one who has no reasonable ground for believing it to be true" (Civ.”
VonGrabe v. Sprint PCS, 312 F. Supp. 2d 1313 (S.D. Cal. 2004). “As to Plaintiffs fraud allegations, this Court instructed Plaintiff that “any such SAC may only assert claims against Sprint PCS (more properly Sprint Telephony PCS, LP dba Sprint PCS) and shall be limited to claims arising out of the Plaintiffs existing claims for fraud (based…”
The MEGA Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, 172 Cal. App. 4th 1522 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009). “) The elements of a cause of action for fraud are well established and not in dispute: (1) a misrepresentation or actionable concealment of fact; (2) knowledge of falsity or the duty of disclosure; (3) intent to defraud or induce reliance; and (4) actual reliance by the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.