11 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 2007–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Boling v. Tennessee State Bankgreen2 sentences2016Boling v. Tennessee State Bank, 890 S.W.2d 32, 35-36 (Tenn.1994) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 549 (1977)). 2016Boling v. Tennessee State Bank, 890 S.W.2d 32 , 35–36 (Tenn. 1994) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 549 (1977)). | 2 | 3 |
Mills v. CSX Transportation, Inc.green2 sentences2010Mills v. CSX Transp., Inc., 300 S.W.3d 627, 631 (Tenn. 2009) (citing Hannan v. Alltel Publ’g Co., 270 S.W.3d 1, 8-9 (Tenn. 2008)). 2010Mills v. CSX Transp., Inc., 300 S.W.3d 627, 631 (Tenn.2009) (citing Hannan v. Alltel Publ’g Co., 270 S.W.3d 1, 8-9 (Tenn.2008)). | 2 | 2 |
Sunderhaus v. Perel & Lowensteingreen2 sentences2010In Sunderhaus v. Perel & Lowenstein, this Court stated that the general rule is that “ordinarily representations of value made by one seeking to dispose of proper ty commercially are to be regarded as expressions of opinion ... not constituting a basis of fraud.” 215 Tenn. 619 , 388 S.W.2d 140, 142 (1965). 2010In Sunderhaus v. Perel & Lowenstein, this Court stated that the general rule is that “ordinarily representations of value made by one seeking to dispose of proper ty commercially are to be regarded as expressions of opinion ... not constituting a basis of fraud.” 215 Tenn. 619 , 388 S.W.2d 140, 142 (1965). | 2 | 2 |
Hannan v. Alltel Publishing Co.red2 sentences2010Mills v. CSX Transp., Inc., 300 S.W.3d 627, 631 (Tenn. 2009) (citing Hannan v. Alltel Publ’g Co., 270 S.W.3d 1, 8-9 (Tenn. 2008)). 2010Mills v. CSX Transp., Inc., 300 S.W.3d 627, 631 (Tenn.2009) (citing Hannan v. Alltel Publ’g Co., 270 S.W.3d 1, 8-9 (Tenn.2008)). | 2 | 2 |
White Ex Rel. Estate of White v. Lawrencegreen2 sentences2010A superseding cause “breaks the chain of proximate causation and thereby precludes recovery.” White v. Lawrence, 975 S.W.2d 525, 529 (Tenn. 1998). 2010A superseding cause “breaks the chain of proximate causation and thereby precludes recovery.” White v. Lawrence, 975 S.W.2d 525, 529 (Tenn.1998). | 2 | 2 |
Baugh v. Novakgreen1 sentence2018In order to bring a successful fraudulent inducement claim, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant “(1) made a false statement concerning a fact material to the transaction (2) with knowledge of the statement’s falsity or utter disregard for its truth (3) with the intent of inducing reliance on the statement, (4) the statement was reasonably relied upon, and (5) an injury resulted from this reliance.” Baugh v. Novak, 340 S.W.3d 372, 388 (Tenn. 2011). | 1 | 1 |
Tina Marie Hodge v. Chadwick Craiggreen1 sentence2017Hodges v. Craig, 382 S.W.3d 325, 343 (Tenn. 2012) (citing Walker v. Sunrise Pontiac– GMC Truck, Inc., 249 S.W.3d 301, 311 (Tenn. 2011); Lapinsky v. Cook, No. E2015– - 16 - 00735–COA–R3–CV, 2016 WL 5385849 , at *14 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 20, 2016) (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
David White v. Empire Express, Inc. and Empire Transportation, Inc.green1 sentence2017See White v. Empire Express, Inc., 395 S.W.3d 696, 717 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2012) (citation omitted). 6 Technically, we observe that Mr. Finch’s fifth raised issue also challenges the trial court’s decision to grant the Realtor Defendants summary judgment on the intentional misrepresentation claim. | 1 | 1 |
Walker v. Sunrise Pontiac-GMC Truck, Inc.green1 sentence2017Hodges v. Craig, 382 S.W.3d 325, 343 (Tenn. 2012) (citing Walker v. Sunrise Pontiac– GMC Truck, Inc., 249 S.W.3d 301, 311 (Tenn. 2011); Lapinsky v. Cook, No. E2015– - 16 - 00735–COA–R3–CV, 2016 WL 5385849 , at *14 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 20, 2016) (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Devorak v. Pattersongreen1 sentence2012See Devorak, 907 S.W.2d at 819 . | 1 | 1 |
Kincaid v. SouthTrust Bankgreen1 sentence2010Fraudulent or Intentional Misrepresentation The defendants rely on the definition of fraud set forth in Kincaid v. SouthTrust Bank, 221 S.W.3d 32, 40 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006), which requires an intentional misrepresentation. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Whaley v. Perkins
green
1 sentence2007In light of the essentially undisputed evidence that the seller’s predecessor-in-title had made no representations of any kind to the purchasers, the court concluded that no cause of action existed because “[t]here is simply no evidence that . . . [the seller’s predecessor-in-title] had any role in the . . . [seller’s] sale of the property to the . . . [purchasers].” Whaley v. Perkins, 197 S.W.3d 665 , 671- 72 (Tenn. 2006). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.