Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Grynberg v. Citation Oil & Gas Corp.

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided October 22, 1997No. NonePublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAmundson, Justice

[¶ 60.] I dissent on Issue One.

[¶ 61.] In order to maintain a cause of action for fraud in addition to breach of contract, “the fraud must be extraneous to the contract, rather than a fraudulent nonperformance of the contract itself.” Bevins v. King, 147 Vt. 203, 514 A.2d 1044, 1045 (1986) (citations omitted). The significance of this distinction is outlined in Bevins

[P]rinciples of contract and principles of fraud must be kept separate and distinct for “[i]f every broken promise were to constitute fraud, ... the resulting instability would severely impair the conduct of business.” See also…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Jim Walter Homes, Inc. v. ReedTexas Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Textron Financial Corp. v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
  3. Brick v. Cohn-Hall-Marx Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1937
  4. Vernon Fire & Casualty Insurance Co. v. SharpIndiana Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Union Bank v. JonesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1980

9 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