What is fraudulent concealment?

Useful Resources for Fraudulent Concealment

Recent Rulings on Fraudulent Concealment

51-75 of 2245 results

SIMMONS V. KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC.

Plaintiff also argues that the fraudulent concealment of defects is independent of any warranty. (Opp’n p. 12:4-12.) Unlike Robinson, where the provision of “false certificates of conformance” was readily found to be “independent” from the “contract loss” of “nonconforming clutches,” here, the alleged failure of Defendant to disclose the “engine defects” completely overlaps what is sought by a contract/warranty remedy—damages for the “nonconforming engine.”

  • Hearing

    Jan 04, 2021

XIAOFAN SUN VS HRC FERTILITY CLINIC, ET AL.

Plaintiff filed a Complaint on May 15, 2019, alleging six (6) causes of action sounding in: (1) Fraud; (2) Fraudulent Concealment; (3) Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations; (4) Professional Negligence; (5) Negligent Training and Supervision; and (6) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.

  • Hearing

    Dec 31, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

RODRIGUEZ VS J.A. MOSS INC

Given these allegations relate to and support the fraudulent concealment cause of action and the sustaining of the demurrer, the Court grants the Motion as to these allegations. The second area Defendant seeks to strike are allegations related to bankruptcy and bailout information (paragraphs 4-6) of Defendant’s alleged predecessor companies. Plaintiff offers no explanation regarding how this information relates to any of the causes of action alleged.

  • Hearing

    Dec 30, 2020

GLORIA WEISCHADLE VS. ALEX VO AND SANTIAGO & JONES, ET AL.,

The Defendant's Fraud, Deceit, False and Negligent Misrepresentation, and Fraudulent Concealment severely harmed the Plaintiff in all aspects of her health and well-being. The damage can never be reversed, restored, or improved. The Defendant intended to inflict fear, deceit, and severe harm to the Plaintiff oi the fraudulent cancer diagnosis and subjected her to unnecessary surgery.

  • Hearing

    Dec 29, 2020

DRAKE KENNEDY, ET AL. VS BRIAN KENNEDY, ET AL.

On October 22, 2018, Drake filed his operative Complaint, alleging 8 causes of action for: (1) appointment of receiver, (2) breach of fiduciary duty, (3) breach of written contract, (4) fraudulent concealment, (5) “removal of Brian Kennedy as a Director,” (6) accounting, (7) financial elder abuse, and (8) conversion. Drake’s operative Complaint alleges that in 2013, Drake brought a lawsuit against Brian alleging similar causes of action.

  • Hearing

    Dec 24, 2020

FRANCISCO FLORES VS NEEMIA CURTEAN, ET AL.

Plaintiff’s Complaint filed October 18, 2019 alleges the following causes of action: (1) fraudulent concealment, (2) fraudulent deceit, (3) “intentional trick without consent,” (4) wrongful eviction against Curtean, as trustee of the Gilmour Trust, (5) conversion against Nichols, (6) conspiracy, (7) intentional infliction of emotional distress. On January 16, 2020, Plaintiff substituted in counsel and ceased being self-represented.

  • Hearing

    Dec 23, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

BRIGHTMAN VS GENERAL MOTORS LLC

Thus, economic loss rule is inapplicable to a claim for fraudulent concealment. The FAC does not sufficiently allege the elements of fraudulent concealment.

  • Hearing

    Dec 21, 2020

NOVIN V LYNN

Plaintiff alleges no facts which support any of these situations, therefore the demurrer t the Fourth cause of action is sustained without leave to amend MOTION TO STRIKE Given that the demurrer to the underlying causes of action for breach of fiduciary dut (Second and Third and causes of action) and fraudulent concealment (Fourth cause of action) ha been sustained without leave to amend, the motion to strike the claims for emotional distres damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees as to those causes of

  • Hearing

    Dec 21, 2020

  • Judge

    : Rebecca Connolly</p>

  • County

    Santa Cruz County, CA

QUINONES VS J.A. MOSS INC

Fraudulent Concealment: The principle is fundamental that deceit may be negative as well as affirmative; it may consist of suppression of that which it is one's duty to declare. (Jones v. Conoco Phillips Co. (2011) 198 Cal. App. 4th 1187, 1198.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 21, 2020

SHANTE CHAPPELL VS THOMAS MILES PHILLIPS ET AL

This is the reliance element of fraudulent concealment. “Every fact constituting the fraud must be alleged, and the policy of liberal construction will not ordinarily be invoked to sustain a defective pleading.” Furia v. Helm, 111 Cal.App.4th 945, 956 (2003). A plaintiff must plead the element of actual reliance with sufficient specificity. Small v. Fritz Companies, Inc., 30 Cal.4th 167, 171 (2003). She must plead the acts she took or did not take because of a representation or concealment. Glaski v.

  • Hearing

    Dec 18, 2020

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

ESTUDILLO V NISSAN NORTH AMERICA

Motion: Demurrer & motion to strike of Defendant Nissan North America, Inc to the first amended complaint TENTATIVE RULING The Court intends to SUSTAIN the Demurrer to the fourth cause of action for fraudulent concealment. Plaintiffs, even after having been given a chance to amend to allege specific defects in its original complaint, have failed to add any specific facts that reflected a representation made by Defendant that would have conflicted with allegedly different known facts.

  • Hearing

    Dec 18, 2020

LARRY LEE VS SHARON XIA ZHANG, ET AL.

(“Bank”) and Does 1-10 for: Elder Abuse Fraud Fraud Fraud Fraudulent Concealment Breach of Fiduciary Duty Cancellation of Written Instrument Under Civil Code § 3412 Cancellation of Written Instrument Under Civil Code § 3412 Quiet Title Constructive Trust A Case Management Conference is set for January 20, 2021. 1.

  • Hearing

    Dec 18, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JEONG V. LEE, ET AL.

In order to plead a fraudulent concealment claim, the plaintiff must allege: (1) the defendant concealed a material fact; (2) the defendant had a duty to disclose the fact to the plaintiff; (3) the defendant intentionally concealed the fact with the intent to defraud the plaintiff; (4) the plaintiff was unaware of the fact and would not have acted as he or she did if he or she had known of the concealed fact; and (5) as a result of the concealment of the fact, the plaintiff sustained damage. (Hahn v.

  • Hearing

    Dec 18, 2020

EDWARD MORENO, JR., ET AL. VS ASHLAND OIL, INC., ET AL.

Fourth Cause of Action (Fraudulent Concealment). Defendant argues that the fourth cause of action does not meet the pleading requirements for fraudulent concealment.

  • Hearing

    Dec 18, 2020

LUCKY'S TWO-WAY RADIOS, INC. ET AL VS FRANK J. CANNATA

The Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) was filed on August 7, 2020, alleging: (1) Breach of Contract; (2) Conversion; (3) Breach of Fiduciary Duty; (4) Fraud and Fraudulent Concealment; (5) Specific Performance; and (6) Permanent Injunction On March 29, 2019, the court granted Cannata’s motion for leave to file a cross-complaint. Cannata filed the first amended cross-complaint against Plaintiffs Lucky’s Two-Way Radios, Inc. and Buddy Corporation on April 10, 2019.

  • Hearing

    Dec 17, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JOSE D. ESPINOZA AGUIRRE VS NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

b) Sufficiency The elements for fraudulent concealment are “(1) concealment or suppression of a material fact; (2) by a defendant with a duty to disclose the fact to the plaintiff; (3) the defendant intended to defraud the plaintiff by intentionally concealing or suppressing the fact; (4) the plaintiff was unaware of the fact and would not have acted as he or she did if he or she had known of the concealed or suppressed fact; and (5) plaintiff sustained damage as a result of the concealment or suppression of

  • Hearing

    Dec 17, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

RICHARD PECH VS AFSHIN MOGHAVEM, ET AL.

., and Prodigy Brands LLC (collectively “Moghavem Defendants”) alleging causes of action for (1) Fraudulent Concealment, (2) Fraudulent False Promise, (3) Interference with Contract, (4) Breach of Contract, and (5) Quantum Meruit. On June 23, 2020, Plaintiff filed two Doe amendments naming Stephen N. Doniger as Doe 1 and Scott Alan Burroughs as Doe 2 (collectively “Attorney Defendants”).

  • Hearing

    Dec 17, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SINCO TECHNOLOGIES PTE LTD V. SOON, ET AL.

The SACC, filed on January 17, 2020, sets 13 forth the following causes of action: (1) Breach of Implied Contract; (2) Breach of Covenant of 14 Good Faith and Fair Dealing; (3) Breach of Fiduciary Duty; (4) Fraud; (5) Negligence; 15 (6) Fraudulent Concealment; (7) Conspiracy to Commit Fraud; (8) Intentional Interference with 16 Contractual Relations; (9) Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage; and 17 (10) Unfair Business Practices. 18 Cross-Complainants allege in the SACC that Xingke was

  • Hearing

    Dec 16, 2020

EDWARD MORENO, JR., ET AL. VS ASHLAND OIL, INC., ET AL.

The Court notes that, for purposes of the fourth cause of action for fraudulent concealment, Plaintiffs must plead with specificity how Plaintiff Edward Moreno, Jr. came into contact with the product manufactured and distributed by demurring Defendant BP Lubricant, what information about that product was concealed from Plaintiff or his employer, and why Plaintiff and/or his employer would have acted differently had they known the concealed information.

  • Hearing

    Dec 16, 2020

PETER NEWTON V. XPRESS GLOBAL SYSTEMS LLC

Defendant relies on one of the alternative elements of fraudulent concealment in CACI 1901. The court does not consider that a necessary element of concealment. At least it does not appear so at the pleading stage. Defendant posits that this is not the type of concealment that plaintiff could have relied upon to his detriment because, by looking at the gate, plaintiff became aware of the concealment. Looking at the gate would reveal the damage, not that plaintiff caused it.

  • Hearing

    Dec 14, 2020

DRAKE KENNEDY, ET AL. VS BRIAN KENNEDY, ET AL.

On October 22, 2018, Drake filed his operative Complaint, alleging 8 causes of action for: (1) appointment of receiver, (2) breach of fiduciary duty, (3) breach of written contract, (4) fraudulent concealment, (5) “removal of Brian Kennedy as a Director,” (6) accounting, (7) financial elder abuse, and (8) conversion. Drake’s operative Complaint alleges that in 2013, Drake brought a lawsuit against Brian alleging similar causes of action.

  • Hearing

    Dec 11, 2020

SUJEY TINOCO VS TERESA MEDICAL CENTER, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

This stands in contrast to Blickman, in which the court held it was inappropriate to sustain a demurrer to a cause of action for negligence because it was duplicative or superfluous to the fraudulent concealment claim—which involved an entirely separate legal theory of recovery. Here, Plaintiff’s ninth cause of action appears duplicative of her FEHA claims.

  • Hearing

    Dec 11, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

EDWARD HOROWITZ, , DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY INC., AND INDIVIDUALLY, ET AL. VS IRA HOROWITZ, ET AL.

Plaintiffs filed the Complaint on May 19, 2020, alleging 9 causes of action for (1) derivative action for breach of fiduciary duty, (2) derivative action for constructive fraud, (3) derivative action for misappropriation of corporate funds, (4) derivative action for waste of corporate assets, (5) derivative action for accounting, (6) breach of fiduciary duty, (7) fraudulent concealment, (8) declaratory relief, and (9) appointment of a receiver.

  • Hearing

    Dec 11, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

LAUREN, BY AND THROUGH HER MOTHER AND GUARDIAN AD LITEM, DEANNA RIVERA RIVERA, ET AL. VS TORRANCE MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER, ET AL.

Complaint, ¶9. 2nd cause of action for fraudulent concealment The elements of a fraud claim are (1) misrepresentation; (2) knowledge of falsity; (3) intent to deceive; and (4) reliance and resulting damage. Vega v. Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue (2004) 121 Cal. App. 4th 282, 290.

  • Hearing

    Dec 11, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

VOGELSANG VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA INC

Plaintiff still fails to plead sufficient facts of delayed discovery, fraudulent concealment, or other tolling. Among other facts, Plaintiff has still failed to plead when he discovered the alleged defect/Defendant's wrongful conduct, merely reasserting his prior allegation that he did not discover the alleged defect/wrongful conduct until "shortly before this action was filed," which the court previously ruled was insufficient. (FAC ¶¶ 57, 71, 74.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 10, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 90     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.