Delaware Chancery Court Rejects Unsupported Fraudulent Inducement Defense


The Delaware Chancery Court rejected a defendant's fraud in the inducement defense where, at the summary judgment stage, the defendant (a) failed to come forward with specific facts showing that the counterparty knowingly made false statements and (b) did not make a proper showing under Rule 56 as to why additional discovery was warranted.

Plaintiff Corkscrew Mining Ventures, Ltd. sued defendant, Preferred Real Estate Investments, Inc. (PREI), seeking specific performance of an agreement obligating PREI to purchase Corkscrew's remaining 12% interest in a mining quarry business. PREI argued that it was fraudulently induced to enter into that contract because Corkscrew misrepresented facts concerning potential environmental liabilities at the quarry in an earlier but related agreement in which PREI purchased 88% of Corkscrew's interest.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.