About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

COMMENTS ON PRELIMINARY DRAFT 77 [i] (1935)

handle is hein.ali/relwtrts0110 and id is 1 raw text is: fe 4.' 1 agres with YOU that you sho. eparate frwaient mis- representations fvm negligent isrep3oseatAtionso' Page 60' The black letter I belle to be w , or at least un. fto'tunat4y pbragod. Z the tint place you ave omitted the neoessaWr qualitfeli adjective before the word statment. It Is dleaw that you enet mean an untmwe statveant or a false statmat. In the second place, I think your pbraseology is lkely to be miwiAestood by most peros even if It is not positively Inaocrate 13n its -nPlatioms. K think Ou should strike out the words the actorts 1oeo If ymo want to get the ems idea sim A .asit upon It., I thinc you night add at the end of the blaak letter the p ,ras to the a*tQr's 3.owidgp Page 7 1 suppose by 6pinon of faots you moan opinion-,based an factsi Nao 8.' 71ret full paragropbe. As vwwt ten Ut doesnot make 41ensee I oisoe he tint two in shoulad read Os the Othem hand, a statemnt of the opiton, hldby a thvd ed t who ts not, or - represate ot to be, a parF to the t;Vmsotgoan. If this 1, nat you mean yoU are treat a ttatget f opinion a a wrpesetatiol of fat Justif ong. the opWio, whle you . as treat the onert 'tatesnt ofinio d+ * separately.o This seems to me to be cuttinag 8rur ,166- fteie for p ho.. Po e 9. o do'not elevee that 4 aprsentatlo thato: thes' defenidant ow ird pA r 'paida a ceta& sa Ocr an article is importaii l1 In thoawixg h )*pqwradet. atilet as of thOat value. Thewpijit at the 00c*~~ation, night. thin the &ssoolation. of the article w1111%th person In ~eto scain in. owsiewship of the sae securitlies -*Ald be a bas$ 0 iue t-pdeso h vAue of the article. Yurtheilnre, he night Ue otoe t6 :ta the article- - 47- 1V 028801eAt o ft 77. Iet mt oft rOt: 6 Pago Io, A, do you catin 'the. saetio to mi~srepresontations conason maters of financia or oomercl Amortanoo? Suose defendant akes a f ant'mIirepweintation to plaintiff which I owl* plaintiff to marry mqWhx w, dissaaed won of grpeat mltb so that plaintifft' fo 4aan6Lmt Ouerz'ea interests are £31 no way diret. ly affeatedd!..Would the defendant not be ruponsible for the relting ham? Page 2. In your notes to the adviisr is your third type of case an aotio4 of deceit at all? %s it not rather a desoemlast of the old action on the oasn for the breah of a noi-s.ant warranty? I suppose that you would hardly conlside an action on the case for breach of non.fradulent warranty an an action for det, You will resmber that in y ia& a. where the prlatiff brought an action on the ease all; rach of a fraudulent warrmnty, he was allowed to recoo on proof of brgach of a nom-frotil ent veamty, I agree with yom that an b1stotlcal note should be include4 if it an be done within reaonable comupose

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most