Buresh v. Seymour

Appellate Court of Illinois

Buresh v. Seymour

187 Ill. App. 295

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedJune 15, 1914

DocketGen. No. 19,635

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 187 Ill. App. 295 (Buresh v. Seymour) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Buresh v. Seymour, 187 Ill. App. 295 (Ill. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Baker

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Fraud, § 113*—proof by circumstantial evidence. Fraud may be proved by circumstantial evidence as well as direct evidence; but there must be shown by a preponderance of the evidence inculpatory facts from which a legitimate inference of fraudulent intent may be drawn. 3. Fraud, § 26*—when misrepresentations concerning a business not actionable. Misrepresentations as to value, probable future business or earnings are not actionable.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Presiding Justice Baker

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Fraud, § 113*—proof by circumstantial evidence. Fraud may be proved by circumstantial evidence as well as direct evidence; but there must be shown by a preponderance of the evidence inculpatory facts from which a legitimate inference of fraudulent intent may be drawn. 3. Fraud, § 26*—when misrepresentations concerning a business not actionable. Misrepresentations as to value, probable future business or earnings are not actionable.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 Ill. App. 295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/buresh-v-seymour-illappct-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack