Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hannegan v. Read Magazine, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided December 9, 1946No. 9268Published

1DissentEdgerton, Associate Justice

The falsity of appellees’ advertising seems to me as clear as its truth seems to the majority of the court. The ques-tion before the court is not whether my view is right but whether it is reasonable.

Any language or conduct that is intended to convey a false impression is a false pretense. No special form is necessary. I think appellees, in several advertisements, made false pretenses concerning the nature of the contest, its extent and duration, and its cost to contestants. I shall discuss only one advertisement and only one sort of pretense.

The puzzles were simple. Appellees knew from…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Federal Trade Commission v. Standard Education SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  2. Farley v. SimmonsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
  3. Putnam v. MorganU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1909

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API