Legal Opinion

Zuckerman v. Cochran

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 20, 1934No. 1 Div. 843PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GARDNER, Justice.

Action for deceit in the purchase of real estate sold by defendant to plaintiff. The foundation of the suit rests upon a future promise as to the resale of the property for a profit.

While a failure to fulfill a mere promise or undertaking — something to be done in the future — alone will not constitute actionable fraud, yet if with intent to deceive a promise is made with no intention of fulfillment at the time, and injury to the defrauded party results therefrom, fraud may be predicated thereon, notwithstanding the future nature of the representations. This is the settled…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Cartwright v. BralySupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
  2. Nelson v. Shelby Manufacturing & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1893
  3. Sharkey v. Burlingame Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Cameron v. Edgemont Investment Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Wall v. GrahamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Barber v. StephensonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1953
  2. Birmingham Broadcasting Co. v. BellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1953
  3. Steiner Bros. v. SlifkinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
  4. Cross v. MaxwellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
  5. Porter v. RobersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955

3 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