Smith v. Vosika
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Action to recover damages for fraud. The demurrer to the complaint was sustained and the plaintiff appeals. The defendant, a real estate broker, induced the plaintiff, so the complaint alleges, to enter into a contract to purchase land upon a fraudulent promise to sell it for him at an advance within a stated time, and did not fulfil his promise.
A broken promise, with nothing more, does not constitute actionable fraud; but a promise made with the intention of not keeping it, for the purpose of deceiving and défrauding another and thereby getting his money or property, or inducing him to…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sallies v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1911
- Albitz v. Minneapolis & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- McElrath v. Electric Investments Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1911
- Hodsden v. HodsdenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
- Roman v. LorenceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Bradley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1931
- Maguire v. MaguireSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
- Engen v. Merchants & Manufacturers State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- Phelps v. Aurora State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
- Wunder v. WunderSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1932
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.