Legal Opinion
Loula v. Snap-On Tools Corp.
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Decided March 2, 1993No. 92-1518PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLaRQCQUE, J.
Snap-On Tools Corporation appeals a judgment awarding Arnold Loula damages in an intentional misrepresentation action. The jury found that Snap-On intentionally made four misrepresentations during Loula's recruitment process: (1) Loula would make as much money as doctors or lawyers; (2) Loula did not have to be a salesperson because the tools would sell themselves; (3) a Snap-On dealership is a no-risk proposition; and (4) Snap-On territories are all the same. We conclude that the four representations are merely expressions of puffery and are inactionable as a matter of law. Therefore, we…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Al Vaughn, Marjorie Vaughn, Algon Corporation and Springfield Drive-Ins, Inc. v. General Foods Corporation and Burger Chef Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- State v. American TV & Appliance of Madison, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1988
- Ritchie v. ClappierCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1982
- Consolidated Papers, Inc. v. Dorr-Oliver, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1989
- Ballenger v. Door CountyCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1986
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Tietsworth v. Harley-Davidson, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
- All-Tech Telecom, Inc. v. Amway CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
- Kary v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
- Bilharz v. First Interstate Bank of WisconsinCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
- Slane v. EmotoDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 2008
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.