truth upon inquiry in North Carolina

2018App. 341 , 511 S.E.2d 309 (1999): “when the party relying on [a] false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Id. at 346 , 511 S.E.2d at 313 .

2018App. 341 , 511 S.E.2d 309 (1999): “when the party relying on [a] false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Id. at 346 , 511 S.E.2d at 313 .

2023Co., 146 N.C. App. 248, 256 (2001) (“It has also been held that when a party relying on a misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must [show] that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.”)). 107.

2017Co. , 146 N.C.App. 248 , 256, 552 S.E.2d 186 , 192 (2001) ("[W]hen a party relying on a 'misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.' " (citation omitted)), disc. review denied , 356 N.C. 438 , 572 S.E.2d 788 (2002).

2014App. 449 , 451–52, 257 S.E.2d 63, 65 (1979)). {27} Furthermore, if the plaintiff could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, then he must show that “he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Id. (citation omitted). {28} Here, Plaintiffs argue that Defendants misrepresented their intent to loan Jackson $650,000 towards the purchase of the Club.

2014App. 449 , 451–52, 257 S.E.2d 63, 65 (1979)). {27} Furthermore, if the plaintiff could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, then he must show that “he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Id. (citation omitted). {28} Here, Plaintiffs argue that Defendants misrepresented their intent to loan Jackson $650,000 towards the purchase of the Club.

2022The plaintiff’s reliance on the misrepresentation “must be reasonable.” Forbis v. Neal, 361 N.C. 519, 527 (2007). “[W]hen the party relying on the false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Hudson-Cole Dev.

2018RSM first argues that Provectus’s fraud claims should be dismissed because Provectus’s own allegations demonstrate that its reliance on any allegedly misleading representations was not reasonable. 100. “[A]ny reliance on . . . allegedly [fraudulent] representations must be reasonable.” Forbis v. Neal, 361 N.C. 519, 527 , 649 S.E.2d 382, 387 (2007). “[W]hen the party relying on [a] false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercis

2020As mentioned above, “[i]f the plaintiff could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not - 27 - have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Songwooyarn Trading, 213 N.C. App. at 54 , 714 S.E.2d at 166 .

2020As mentioned above, “[i]f the plaintiff could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not - 27 - have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Songwooyarn Trading, 213 N.C. App. at 54 , 714 S.E.2d at 166 .

2018Textiles, Inc. v. Price Waterhouse, LLP, 350 N.C. 214, 224 , 513 S.E.2d 320, 327 (1999). “[W]hen the party relying on the false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Bucci v. Burns, 2018 NCBC LEXIS 93 , at *5 (N.C.

2018Textiles, Inc. v. Price Waterhouse, LLP, 350 N.C. 214, 224 , 513 S.E.2d 320, 327 (1999). “[W]hen the party relying on the false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Bucci v. Burns, 2018 NCBC LEXIS 93 , at *5 (N.C.

2018North Carolina courts have held that “when the party relying on false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Oberlin Capital, L.P. v. Slavin, 147 N.C.

2012App. 284, 291 , 540 S.E.2d 761, 766 (2000) (holding that “negligent misrepresentation by a third party which induced plaintiffs to become shareholders created . . . a special duty.”). {59} Plaintiffs must also take reasonable steps in relying on the information provided for investment. “‘[W]hen the party relying on the false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.’” Oberlin Capital, L.P. v. Slavin, 1

2025For either claim, “to establish justifiable reliance a plaintiff must sufficiently allege that he made a reasonable inquiry into the misrepresentation and allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Arnesen v. Rivers Edge Golf Club & Plantation, Inc., 368 N.C. 440, 454 (2015) (citation and internal punctuation omitted). 134. “[W]hen the party relying on the false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunit

2017Similarly, in Arnesen v. Rivers Edge Golf Club & Plantation, Inc. , 368 N.C. 440 , 781 S.E.2d 1 (2015), the Court relied on Dallaire to affirm the dismissal of the plaintiffs' negligent misrepresentation claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).

2018App. 529, 534 , 537 S.E.2d 237, 241 (2000)). 114. “[W]hen the party relying on the false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Associated Packaging, Inc. v. Jackson Paper Mfg.

2012App. 695, 700 , 671 S.E.2d 7, 12 (2009) (quoting Raritan River Steel Co., 322 N.C. at 206 , 367 S.E.2d at 612 ). {33} Furthermore, “‘when the party relying on the false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.’” Oberlin Capital, L.P. v. Slavin, 147 N.C.

2012App. 121, 125 , 254 S.E.2d 217, 220 (1979). {69} “As to . . . the tort of fraud, when the party relying upon false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” Hudson- Cole Dev.

2012App. 284, 291 , 540 S.E.2d 761, 766 (2000) (holding that “negligent misrepresentation by a third party which induced plaintiffs to become shareholders created . . . a special duty.”). {59} Plaintiffs must also take reasonable steps in relying on the information provided for investment. “‘[W]hen the party relying on the false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.’” Oberlin Capital, L.P. v. Slavin, 1

2011App. 639, 645 , 599 S.E.2d 410, 414 (2004), aff'd per curiam, 360 N.C. 167 , 622 S.E.2d 495 (2005), the Town argues further that when the party relying on a false or misleading representation could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, that party must show that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.

2005App. 28, 35 , 428 S.E.2d 841, 846 (1993).

2005App. 341, 346 , 511 S.E.2d 309, 313 (1999) for the proposition that where one relies on a “misleading representation, [but] could have discovered the truth upon inquiry, the complaint must allege that he was denied the opportunity to investigate or that he could not have learned the true facts by exercise of reasonable diligence.” “Even if there is no duty to disclose information, if a seller does speak then he must make a full and fair disclosure of the matters he discloses.” Freese v. Smith, 110 N.C.