Legal Opinion

Richmond v. Dart Industries, Inc.

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 2, 1987No. C000097PublishedCited by 96 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SIMS, J.

—Plaintiffs Harold Richmond and his class of 2,600 purchasers of land at Tahoe-Donner subdivision appeal from a judgment entered in favor of defendant Dart Industries, Inc., following a four month jury trial. The jury returned a general verdict for defendant on plaintiffs’ claims that defendant committed fraud and violated the Subdivided Lands Act (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 11000 et seq.) by misrepresenting the availability of water and sewer services at Tahoe-Donner. (All further statutory references are to the Business and Professions Code unless otherwise indicated.) Following…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Tupman v. HaberkernCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Richmond v. Dart Industries, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Ernst v. SearleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Panopulos v. MaderisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Gray v. BrinkerhoffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by96 opinions

  1. McLaughlin v. National Union Fire InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  2. Board of Administration v. WilsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
  3. Bullock v. Phillip Morris USA, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2008
  4. Johnson v. Pratt & Whitney Canada, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1994
  5. Bihun v. AT & T Information Systems, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1993

91 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