Hi-Way v. Int'l Harvester

2 Citing briefs

  1. Conlin v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. ("MERS") et al

    MOTION to Dismiss and Brief in Support

    Filed December 12, 2011

    Plaintiff’s Fraud Claim Fails Because They Have Not Pled Fraud With The Requisite Particularity In order to state a claim of fraud, Plaintiff is required to plead: (1) That defendant made a material misrepresentatio; (2) that it was false; (3) that when he made it he knew that it was false, or made it recklessly, without any knowledge of its truth, and as a positive assertion; (4) that he made it with the intention that it should be acted upon by Plaintiffs; (5) that Plaintiffs acted in reliance upon it; and (6) that he thereby suffered injury. 5:11-cv-15352-JCO-MAR Doc # 7 Filed 12/12/11 Pg 20 of 29 Pg ID 463 13 D Y K E M A G O S S E T T• A P R O F E S S IO N A L LI M IT E D L IA B IL IT Y C O M P A N Y •3 95 77 W O O D W A R D A V E N U E• S U IT E 3 00 •B L O O M F IE L D H IL L S , M IC H IG A N 4 83 04 Hi-Way Motor Co. v. Int’l Harvester Co., 398 Mich. 330, 336 (1976) (internal quotations omitted). The absence of any one of these elements is fatal to recovery.

  2. Travis v. ADT Security Services, Incorporated et al

    REPLY to Response re MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint

    Filed July 3, 2012

    Future promises are contractual and do not constitute fraud.” Hi-Way Motor Co. v. Int’l Harvester Co., 398 Mich. 330, 336, 247 N.W.2d 813, 816 (1976). And as this Court recently noted, a representation that relates to the future (i.e., if your alarm is verified, I will call the police) sounds in contract, not tort: Since fraud must relate to facts then existing or which have previously existed, the general rule is that fraud cannot be predicated upon statements promissory in their                                                              2 Although Travis initially pled two fraud claims, he has since agreed to dismiss one.