Legal Opinion

Ebbs v. St. Louis Union Trust Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 2, 1930PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBkogdeN, J.

The evidence, issues and verdict present this situation: A real estate agent makes certain false representations as to the character and condition of a house which he proposes to sell, but these representations are made without knowledge of their falsity, and hence as a necessary consequence without intent to deceive. It is therefore apparent that this action cannot be maintained by the plaintiff as a suit for damages for fraud and deceit. Scienter and intent to deceive are essential elements of actionable fraud. Corley Co. v. Griggs, 192 N. C., 171, 134 S. E., 406; Peyton v. Griffin, 195 N.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Shipp Ex Rel. Shipp v. United Stage Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  2. Hinson v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
  3. Peyton v. . GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  4. Long v. U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  5. Corley Co. v. . GriggsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Aiello v. Ed Saxe Real Estate, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. Cheek v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. Harrison v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  4. Tarlton v. KeithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  5. Alderman v. BivinSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1958

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API