Metz v. American Electric Power Co.
Ohio Court of Appeals
1DissentBryant, Judge
{¶ 61} Being unable to agree with the lead opinion, I write separately.
{¶ 62} Appellants’ complaint asserts both a fraud claim, as well as a quasi-contract claim premised on bad faith. Because they are separate claims, I address fraud separately from bad faith. To prevail on their fraud claim, appellants must prove that appellees knowingly made a false and material representation with intent to induce reliance. Williams v. Aetna Fin. Co. (1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 464, 700 N.E.2d 859. In that context, appellants claim that AEP falsely represented AEP’s profits and bonuses in an attempt to retain…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Williams v. Aetna Finance Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1998
- Kalain v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 1986
- Hamilton Insurance Services, Inc. v. Nationwide InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- Ullmann v. MayOhio Supreme Court · 1947
- Tibbs v. National Homes Construction Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1977
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.