reliance

In tort for deceit, it is necessary for plaintiff to prove that he relied on misrepresentation though such misrepresentation need not be the sole or even dominant reason for acting if it was a substantial factor in the plaintiffs decision. For fraud purposes, "reliance" might be defined as a belief which motivates an act. Berry v. Robotka, 9 Ariz.App. 461, 453 P.2d 972, 979.

The test of "reliance" on misrepresentation in sale of stock as ground for recovery under Securities Exchange Act is whether the misrepresentation is a substantial factor in determining the course of conduct which results in the recipient's loss. Where case involves primarily a failure to disclose, positive proof of reliance is not a prerequisite for recovery; all that is necessary is that the facts withheld be material in sense that reasonable investor might have considered them important in making of such decision. Gordon v. Burr, D.C.N.Y., 366 F.Supp. 156, 165.

Term "reliance" as used in rule imposing liability on one who volunteers to undertake action for the protection of another's person or things for failure to exercise reasonable care if harm is suffered because of the other's reliance upon the undertaking connotes dependence; it bespeaks a voluntary choice of conduct by the person harmed and infers that the person exercising it can decide between available alternatives. Barnum v. Rural Fire Protection Co., 24 Ariz.App. 233, 537 P.2d 618, 622.

See also estoppel

- fraud

- material fact

- misrepresentation

@ reliance on promise

In promissory estoppel, the plaintiff is required to prove that he relied on promise of defendant to his damage.

See also promissory estoppel

@