Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Hunt Petroleum Corp. v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 30, 2004No. 1011762Published

1Concurrence

I concur with the majority's opinion that the State of Alabama did not prove the "reasonable reliance" element of its fraud claim. However, I write specially to note that even if there had been evidence of reliance, there would still be many problems with the trial court's judgment against Hunt, mostly stemming from a problem that permeates this case and many other cases: a misunderstanding of the fundamental difference between claims of breach of contract and claims of fraud.

I recently discussed the difference between breach-of-contract and fraud claims in my special concurrence in Dickinson…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Huron Tool and Engineering Co. v. Precision Consulting Services, Inc.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. HTP, Ltd. v. Lineas Aereas CostarricensesSupreme Court of Florida · 1996
  3. Waddell & Reed, Inc. v. UNITED INVEST. LIFE INS. CO.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2003
  4. SHADES, ETC. v. Cobbs, Allen & Hall Mortg. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1980
  5. Johnson v. Shenandoah Life Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Alabama · 1973

21 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