Tarnowski v. Resop
Minnesota Supreme Court
236 Minn. 33, 51 N.W.2d 801 (1952)
- Written by John Caddell, JD
Facts
Resop (defendant) agreed to act as an agent for Tarnowski (plaintiff) in a deal to purchase a coin-operated music machine business. Resop recommended that Tarnowski purchase Philllip Loechler and Lyle Mayer’s business. Resop did not investigate the business and instead presented the sellers’ fraudulent claims about the business to Tarnowski. Resop accepted a secret $2,000 commission from the sellers in exchange for making the recommendation. When Tarnowski discovered the fraud, he rescinded the contract and sued the sellers in the District Court of Olmstead County. The sellers paid $9,500 to settle the claim. Tarnowski then sued Resop to recover profits Resop made in brokering the deal and expenses and attorneys fees Tarnowski incurred as a result of the sale. The jury awarded Tarnowski $5,200. Resop appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Knutson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 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.
