Behrendt v. Rassmussen, 234 Minn. 97 (1951)

Citation: Behrendt v. Rassmussen, 234 Minn. 97 (1951)
Parent Document: Behrendt v. Rassmussen, 234 Minn. 97 (1951)
Jurisdiction: Minnesota (state)
Effective Date: 1951-04-27
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2038236/behrendt-v-rassmussen/ ↗

Full Text

862 chars

In Reid v. Brown, 24 N. J. Misc. 350, 352, 49 A. (2d) 311, 313 (district court), plaintiff moved out after defendant, upon false representations, secured a certificate from the OPA permitting defendant to dispossess plaintiff. The court stated that a “cause of action in deceit can also be spelled out. Defendant made her representations to plaintiff as well as to the OPA.” Plaintiff had acted on the representations. The court stated that the cause of action was not statutory, but based on common-law principles. In addition to the above as a basis of recovery, the court allowed recovery on the ground that “Depriving a party of a statutory right by fraud is no less a remediable injury than depriving him of the benefits of a contract.” See, Nyulassie v. Mozer, 85 Cal. App. (2d) Supp. 827, 193 P. (2d) 167; Teare v. Sussman, 120 Colo. 488, 210 P. (2d) 446.

Other Sections in This Document (55)

Full Text