Legal Opinion

Mirkin v. Wasserman

California Supreme Court

Decided September 9, 1993No. S020465PublishedCited by 227 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PANELLI, J.

We granted review to determine whether plaintiffs, who purchased securities at a price allegedly affected by misrepresentations, can plead a cause of action for deceit under Civil Code sections 1709 and 1710 without alleging that they actually relied on the misrepresentations. We hold that plaintiffs may not do so.

I. Facts

This case, which comes to us after the superior court sustained defendants’ demurrer, presents a pure question of law. The material allegations of the complaint, which we assume to be true for the purpose of reviewing such rulings (Garcia v. Superior Court…

2Cases cited68 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  5. Basic Inc. v. LevinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1988

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

3Cited by227 opinions

  1. Shroyer v. New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  2. In Re Tobacco II CasesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Wilson v. Hewlett-Packard Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
  4. Alliance Mortgage Co. v. RothwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Olson v. Major League BaseballCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2022

222 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