Edson v. Fogarty
Illinois Appellate Court
138 N.E.3d 238 (2019)
- Written by Robert Cane, JD
Facts
Tom Edson (plaintiff) sought to purchase a condominium property. David Horwich (defendant), the seller’s broker, informed Edson that the property was zoned commercial and suitable for a grocer. However, the property was not zoned commercial, so it was not suitable for a grocer. Edson sued Horwich, claiming that Horwich was liable for negligent misrepresentations and fraud, among other claims. Horwich moved for summary judgment, arguing that his representations about the property’s zoning classification were statements of law, not statements of fact, and thus could not support an action for negligent misrepresentations and fraud. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Horwich. Edson appealed, arguing that the representations regarding the zoning classification were statements of fact.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hyman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.