709 So. 2d 39 - Hammonds v. Turnipseed’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The elements of fraud are (1) a false representation (2) of a material existing fact (3) reasonably relied upon by the plaintiff (4) who suffered damage as a proximate consequence of the misrepresentation. To prevail on a promissory fraud claim such as that at issue here, that is, one based upon a promise to act or not to act in the future, two additional elements must be satisfied: (5) proof that at the time of the misrepresentation, the defendant had the intention not to perform the act promised, and (6) proof that the defendant had an intent to deceive.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 613 F. Supp. 2d 1271 - Parsons & Whittemore Enterprises Corp. v. Cello Energy, LLC

2. “"It is well settled that circumstantial evidence may be used to prove fraudulent intent. The evidence, however, `must be of such quality that "the jury, as reasonable persons, may fairly and reasonably infer the ultimate fact to be proved."' Pinyan [v. Community Bank], 644 So.2d [919] at 924 [(Ala. 1994)](quoting Marshall Durbin Farms, Inc. v. Landers, 470 So.2d 1098 , 1101 (Ala. 1985))."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 778 So. 2d 167 - Grand Manor, Inc. v. Dykes