History of the Connecticut Judicial Seal Home Home BannerBanner


 

 

 

 

 

   

3.14-4  Fraudulent/Intentional Misrepresentation

Revised to January 1, 2008

In order to prevail on (his/her) claim of fraudulent/intentional misrepresentation the plaintiff must prove 1) that the defendant made a false representation as a statement of fact, 2) the statement was untrue and the defendant knew it was untrue, 3) the defendant made the false statement in order to induce the plaintiff to rely on the false statement, and 4) the plaintiff did rely on the false statement to (his/her) detriment.

The plaintiff must prove the first three elements by clear and convincing evidence.  (He/she) must prove the fourth element by a preponderance of the evidence.

Authority

Dalia v. Lawrence, 226 Conn. 51, 78 (1993); Miller v. Appleby, 183 Conn. 51, 55 (1981); DeLuca v. C.W. Blakeslee & Sons, Inc., 174 Conn. 535, 546 (1978).

Notes

"The intentional withholding of information for the purpose of inducing action has been regarded . . . as equivalent to a fraudulent misrepresentation.  1 Restatement (Second), Contracts § 161. . . ."  (Citations omitted.)  Pacelli Bros. Transportation, Inc. v. Pacelli, 189 Conn. 401, 407 (1983). 

See Clear and Convincing Evidence, Instruction 3.2-2.
 


 

Attorneys | Case Look-up | Courts | Directories | Educational Resources | E-Services | Español | FAQ's | Juror Information | Media | Opinions | Opportunities | Self-Help | Home

Common Legal Words | Contact Us | Site Map | Website Policies and Disclaimers

Copyright © 2011, State of Connecticut Judicial Branch