Dickinson v. Atkins
Appellate Court of Illinois
Action on the Case, for deceit. Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Theodore Brentano, Judge, presiding.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sears
Upon the evidence presented in this record, we are of opinion no recovery could be sustained under the second count of the declaration. The facts proved in support of that count would establish a flagrant breach of contract, but they do not sustain an action for deceit. To sustain an action for deceit, it must be established that the representations complained of were false; that they related to matters material to the transaction, and not solely to promises as to matters in futuro; that the defendant making the false representations then knew them to be false, and that the plaintiff,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. DunleavyIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
- Merwin v. ArbuckleIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
- Schwabacker v. RiddleIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
- Wheeler v. RandallIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
- McBean v. FoxAppellate Court of Illinois · 1878
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Worthen v. ThomsonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1951
- Cantwell v. HardingAppellate Court of Illinois · 1910
- Press v. HairAppellate Court of Illinois · 1907