Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Burke v. Harman

574 N.W.2d 156 (1998)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...

Burke v. Harman

Nebraska Court of Appeals

574 N.W.2d 156 (1998)

Facts

John Burke (plaintiff) bought a blanket at an antique mall for $115. The tag on the blanket identified it as a 1930s Southwest wool handwoven throw. Burke used the blanket as a rug, and a houseguest suggested that he investigate its origins. Burke, a woodcarver who collected historical wood carvings, remembered Kenneth Harman (defendant). Harman was a teacher who spent significant time collecting various objects and had a large home library of books involving collectibles. Harman and Burke had met a few months earlier when Harman purchased some objects from Burke. Burke took the blanket to Harman’s home for him to evaluate. Burke showed Harman the blanket and asked him what it was. Harman said it could be Mexican and offered Burke $500 and two Indian dolls in exchange for the blanket. Burke refused, and Harman gave Burke $1,000 cash for the blanket. The blanket turned out to be a rare Navajo chief’s blanket, first phase, Ute style, and Harman sold it to a third party for $290,000, its fair market value. Burke sued Harman, asserting a cause of action for negligent representation, among other claims. Burke alleged that Harman should have known the blanket’s value at the time Burke sold it to Harman. Harman’s home reference library contained two books with pictures of Navajo chief’s blankets, first phase, Ute style. The parties stipulated to the blanket’s value at the time of the sale. At the close of trial, Harman moved for a directed verdict on Burke’s negligent-misrepresentation claim. Harman argued that the damages in a negligent-misrepresentation claim, unlike a fraudulent-misrepresentation claim, were limited to out-of-pocket damages. Harman argued that because Burke conceded he had de minimis out-of-pocket expenses in selling the blanket to Harman, Harman was entitled to a directed verdict. The trial court agreed and granted the directed verdict. Burke appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Sievers, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 603,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership