How JustAnswer Works:

  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.

Ask Zachary Your Own Question

Zachary
Zachary, Attorney
Category: Business Law
Satisfied Customers: 3638
Experience:  Internationational Commercial Attorney
Type Your Business Law Question Here...
Zachary is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I need to prove a frudulent misrepresentaion - i ahve all the

Customer Question

I need to prove a frudulent misrepresentaion - i ahve all the elements requried except the intent - deciepter.

What are the possible strategies to prove it? I have a motief - my realtors represented that my tenatns will be excellent, and thus i executed a contract and they made the fees as a result, but how do i prove intent?

The issue is that my realtors rented my house to drug dealers and diod not verify their informaino while under N.J.A.C. 11:5-6.4(b) and while promissed to do to.

What and how can i get an argue the intent - please provide typical argument logical and factual if possible? i ahve all - contract, promise the tenants will be excellent, a evidence that the info was not verified (a comparison of what was presented, and what is in reality in public recrods).

How can i prove an intent in this case and how can i argue that , even speculatively? and what is tyupically in NJ accepted by judges opr as evidence in courts.
Submitted: 8 months ago.
Category: Business Law
Expert:  Zachary replied 8 months ago.
Hi,

I see you have a few other questions opened.

It appears from those questions that you are in the process of writing your complaint. If so, then you need to only make an allegation that the fraudulent misrepresentation was done with intent to satisfy the pleading rules at this point.

Proving intent is often the most difficult part of a fraudulent misrepresentation case. This is why you would also want to plead "negligent misrepresentation" as a claim in your complaint. Under New Jersey law, a cause of action for negligent misrepresentation may exist when a party negligently provides false information. To prevail on a negligent misrepresentation claim, a plaintiff must prove
that the defendant negligently made an incorrect statement, upon which the plaintiff justifiably relied. You do not have to prove intent, you only have to prove that they had a duty to provide you with the correct information.

In New Jersey, the five elements of common law fraud are "(1) a material misrepresentation of a presently existing or past fact; (2) knowledge or belief by the defendant of its falsity; (3) an intention that the other person rely on it; (4) reasonable reliance thereon by the other person; and (5) resulting damages." See, e.g., Panella v. O'Brien, No. 05-1790, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59880, 2006 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN *8 (D.N.J. Aug. 24, 2006).

An intent for you to rely on the information is proved when you show that the knowingly sent you false information. In your case, you are alleging that they should have checked to see the tenant's criminal background.

So, what you need to show proof of intent is a representation in writing or a verbal representation that they did in fact check the tenant's criminal background and provided that written representation to you for you to rely upon. Then you will need to show that they never actually performed the check. You will need to request all the documents in their possession, custody and control (1) showing that they did in fact ask for a criminal background report, and (2) showing the actual criminal background report they obtained, if in fact they did so.

If they did get the report, but then failed to inform you that there was a criminal history that would disqualify the tenant, then you would need to show through cross examination that the reason they did not inform you of this is because they wanted to make sure to get a commission. If you can only show that they made a mistake by not telling you, then you have negligent misrepresentation as opposed to fraudulent misrepresentation.

If they did not get the report, then all you have to show is that they made the representation to you that the tenant had no criminal history that would disqualify them.

Please let me know if you have any further questions. Please also kindly consider rating my answer positively so that I am compensated by the website for my work on your question. Rating positively does not cause an additional charge and does not prevent us from further discussing your questions.

Best Regards,
ZDN
Zachary, Attorney
Category: Business Law
Satisfied Customers: 3638
Experience: Internationational Commercial Attorney
Zachary and other Business Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 8 months ago.

You wrote:


If they did not get the report, then all you have to show is that they made the representation to you that the tenant had no criminal history that would disqualify them.


Here is Here what i have for the realtor's actions:

1. my contract with Realtor signed in Oct 1 - standard MLS contract, I give realtors a right to rent my place for a contingent fee, no other conditions except their fee. I have proof of that.

2. Defendants verbal promise to perform verification of financial information - income and employment and credit (but not criminal, although i found that the tenants had court cases against them) - can't prove that they promissed , not written anywhere - nowhere recorded. ...BUT

a. have evidence they requested the w-2, paystubs, 1040 for both tenants, and a credit report for one tenant, but not the other tenan - can prove it - can argue that it was to make good on a promise

b. have my evidence that i used public sources - state NJ business registration website, google info, reference check - showing info provided by tenants is wrong and forged - can prove it.

c. their explicit email in which the agent claims she "I know they will be excellent tenants", reasonably implying she verified the info. - can prove the email (she they admitted to me verbally she did not verify it but realied on the tenant realtor argunment that the tenants are suitable.


3. As part of N.J.A.C. 11:5-6.4 they had a specific legal requirements for the Real Estate brokers (b) to make a reasonable effort to ascertain material information that includes financial qualifications of every person for whom they would submit an offer to the Plaintiff, and to disclose to Plaintiff any material facts about the perspective tenants' financial condition that might have affected the Plaintiff's decision to execute the transaction. So cant prove the priomise but they were also under the law to verify.


Here is my understanding: I DO NOT have the promise expressly written in the contract that she will verify the info. Only evidence that she acted on that promise and requested 1040, paystubs, etc information about tenants, so kind of my knowlege of the truth, rather than the truth that would be accepted by the court?


How would you argue a frudulent misrep using those facts? Where is the proof of intent here?
Expert:  Zachary replied 8 months ago.
Well, I think you have a problem here. If the agent did not promise to conduct a criminal background check, then there will not be a duty implied on the agent under the law, nor will there be a fraud. The statement "I know they will be excellent tenants" is going to be somewhat difficult to use as the basis for fraud. It has to be a explicit statement of material fact. The issue here is whether this would qualify as "puffery" or not. A statement is considered material if a reasonable person would attach importance to its existence in determining a choice of action or if the person making the statement knew, or had reason to know, that the recipient would regard the matter as important in determining the choice of action even if a reasonable person would not so regard it. Suarez, supra, at 33 (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts § 538(2) (1977)). If the defendant can convince the trier of fact that the representation made to the plaintiff was mere puffery as opposed to a material misrepresentation as puffery will not support a plaintiff’s recovery. See Dabush v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, 378 N.J. Super. 105, 115 (App. Div. 2005); see also Rodio v. Smith, 123 N.J. 345, 352 (1991) (“However persuasive, ‘You're in good hands with Allstate,’ is nothing more than puffery”); New Jersey Citizen Action Group v. Schering-Plough, 367 N.J. Super. 8, 13 (App. Div. 2003) (statements in pharmaceutical company's advertising for allergy medication that “you . . . can lead a normal nearly symptom-free life again” were not understood by consumers as a guarantee of total and universal effectiveness of the product and were in the nature of puffery.

Most recently, in Suarez, the Appellate Division concluded that representations by defendant’s school admissions representative to plaintiff that plaintiff would, upon completion of a certification program, be able to perform ultrasounds and earn $65,000 per year, were material and a jury could conclude that a reasonable person would attach importance to such statements in selecting a school. See Suarez, supra, at 34-35. Further, there was evidence that defendant knew that the ability to be employed as an entry-level sonographer upon completion of the program was critical to plaintiff’s decision in whether to enroll in the school. Id. at 35. Moreover, after completing defendant’s program, plaintiff was unable to find employment because she needed a certification that was unattainable because defendant’s school did not have the proper accreditation. Although defendant argued that certification was not required and that plaintiff was, indeed, employable, the Court found that this created a question of fact sufficient to overturn the lower court’s award of summary judgment to defendant. Id. at 37-38; see also Union Ink Co., Inc. v. AT&T Corp., 352 N.J. Super. 617, 645 (App. Div. 2002) (citing Chattin v. Cape May Greene, Inc. (I), 216 N.J. Super.618, 639 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 107 N.J. 148 (1987)) (whether a statement constitutes a misrepresentation as opposed to puffery presents a question of fact and must be determined by the trier of fact).

My understanding of what you are saying is that the agent represented that they were credit worthy, which turned out not to be true. The agent is supposed to do some due diligence on the application and should not simply rely on the statements made by the applicant. This is true where the agent's job is to bring you credit worthy tenants.

So perhaps the focus of your fraud claim should be on the fact that the agent represented they would be good tenants and had a good credit and rental history, when in fact they were criminals and had a bad credit history. In other words, broaden the fraud/negligent misrepresentation allegations.
Customer: replied 8 months ago.

You wrote :


My understanding of what you are saying is that the agent represented that they were credit worthy, which turned out not to be true. The agent is supposed to do some due diligence on the application and should not simply rely on the statements made by the applicant. This is true where the agent's job is to bring you credit worthy tenants.
Yes they promissed they will do credit and income check and it turns out theyb were under obligation by virtue of the N.J.A.C. 11:5-6.4(b). THat is a law, correct? Regarless of what they promissed and wheather i can priove it? So her statement "i know they will be excellent tenants" was to induce me to execute a contract, in fact a guarantee - is that the argument i can make? She was making it to accomodate her explicit primise (which i cant prove that she made it, only by virtue that she requested the data from tenants) and to accomdate law that required her to verify finacial information - where is the flaw in this argument?


http://www.true-agent.com/NJadminCode.pdf


(b) Every licensee shall make reasonable effort to ascertain all material information concerning the physical


condition of every property for which he or she accepts an agency or which he or she is retained to market as a


transaction broker, and concerning the financial qualifications of every person for whom he or she submits an offer to


his or her client or principal. Information about social conditions and psychological impairments

Expert:  Zachary replied 8 months ago.
No flaw in it. That's the argument you would make. The agent owes you a fiduciary duty. The duty is about the "financial qualifications." This does not necessarily mean the "criminal background", although it may certainly be argued that a tenant with a criminal history may have an impediment on their record which could affect their financial qualification to pay rent.

You are also correct that you will have to argue that the "they are going to be great tenants" statement was made to induce you into the transaction, for the sole purpose of her making her commission.

So, you can show she had the duty to check out their financial qualifications and failed to do it. You can show that she made a representation to you that they would be excellent tenants, when a simple check of publicly available records showed they had criminal histories. This is enough to bring a case to the jury for negligent misrepresentation. If you can develop testimony from her through cross examination that she knew or should have known that the information she was providing to you was false, and that she did it because she wanted to the commission, you have a case for fraud.
Zachary, Attorney
Category: Business Law
Satisfied Customers: 3638
Experience: Internationational Commercial Attorney
Zachary and other Business Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 8 months ago.

 


So it seems only testimony would be a proof that there was fraud if she admits it? What might be the questions that i might use to lead her into the corner of admitting that she in fact did not know something to be true and made the statmeen reckloessly? I understand that that would still be classified as fraudulent, correct?


 


I understand that i have to in details provide that i used simple public records check and found that information provided was counterfeited, forgedm correct? Here is how i do that - do you see any issue/questions from the judge on this challengin this? Should i make it with copies of the google searches, NJ business tregistration site search results:?


 


 



  1. Later in the week, Plaintiff performed simple and reasonable check of the financial information provided by tenants Negron and Ortiz, using public sources of information as well NJ business registration website, and that revealed issues, errors and problems that indicate the provided documents do not contain correct and true information about tenants employment and income and are missing a credit of Ortiz.

    1. the w-2 forms provided for Negron had incorrect addresses of employer Financial Care, LLC - it was missing apartment number and the building itself is located in a residential area.

    2. Financial Care Plus, Inc does not exist at all in NJ State Business Registration website and no information about it is available in public internet sources(w-2 of Ortiz claimed that she works for Financial Care Plus).

    3. On or about December 27 2012 Plaintiff called the phone numbers of the supervisors listed on the Negron and Ortiz rental application and found that out of 3 numbers provided 2 are disconnected, and one was answered by unrelated person who never heard of Negron and Ortiz.

    4. On or about December 27 2012 Plaintiff contacted the registered owner of Financial Care, LLC, Michael B. Norton, who he found through Google search and in public NJ state business registration website https://www.njportal.com/DOR/businessrecords/EntityDocs/BusinessStatCopies.aspx, and the owner, Michael Kerrick, confirmed that he never heard about Negron and Ortiz and that they never worked for his company, and that his company, a single member LLC, is owned by him and located in the residential area, his primary address.

    5. No public information on Financial Care Plus exists in NJ state registration website or on any public sources such as Google. The company has no website, not registered with the state of NJ and no information is available in any public sources.

    6. Credit report on Ortiz has not been requested and reviewed or was reviewed and withheld.


  2. Upon information and belief the employment documents (w-2, 1040, paystubs) provided by the applicant tenants Negron and Ortiz are forged and fake. Credit report of Ortiz has not been ran and/or reviewed and no consent to run Ortiz or Negron credit reports are available in the file the Defendants shared with Plaintiff related to the rental of the Plaintiff's property.


 


If you were the judge how would you challenge that argument taht proves that had she done any reasonable simple check she would ahve disovered what i have?

Expert:  Zachary replied 8 months ago.
1. What might be the questions that i might use to lead her into the corner of admitting that she in fact did not know something to be true and made the statmeen reckloessly? I understand that that would still be classified as fraudulent, correct?

It's not a simple matter to develop, but here are some general questions that you would want to use:

You are paid a commission upon the succesful rental of this property correct?

You would agree then that you have an interest in making sure that the property is rented to the tenant that you submit an application for, correct?

And when you were paid a commission in this case, werent you?

You are under an obligation to make sure that the tenant is financially qualified to rent, aren't you.

And you would agree that this obligation requires due diligence on your part.

And certainly, you would agree that this involves more than merely taking the applying tenant's word for it based on what they write in their application, don't you?

In any case, the tenant can simply write down false information, and if you don't do any due diligence, then you are simply relying on the false information, correct?

And this would not be living up to your obligation would it?

Tell me everything you did to check the financial qualifications of the applicant tenants?

A simple check of publically available documents shows that the tenant has a criminal history. Why did you fail to find that?
Why didn't you take the time to find it?

I'm going to show you some documents (hand the documents you talk about above). I want you to tell me what each of these documents are.

After she does that...You did not take the time to look up any of this information on the tenants did you.

In fact, you represented to me that these were excellent tenants, did you not?

You told me that because you were only interest in earning a quick commission, isn't that true?

How could it not be true, when you didn't do any due diligence and made the representation that they were excellent tenants, correct?

A quick investigation on your part would have shown you that this wasn't true, correct?

But, you didn't do that did you? (If she did, then you have her on fraud because she did not tell you).

2. If you were the judge how would you challenge that argument taht proves that had she done any reasonable simple check she would ahve disovered what i have?

You've got to remember that the judge is not going to challenge anything you submit. That's not how the court works. It is the duty of your opponent (not the judge) to raise objections. The second thing you need to remember is that the challenge will not be on your pleading/complaint. You are only under a requirement to provide enough details in your complaint so that the other side knows what you are claiming. You do not have to list the details you are stating above. This will not be needed until the summary judgment process starts (if a motion is filed by the defense). Then you will need to submit an affidavit and the documents you have referenced above to show the judge that you have facts which support your claim and on which a jury could decide in your favor.
Zachary, Attorney
Category: Business Law
Satisfied Customers: 3638
Experience: Internationational Commercial Attorney
Zachary and other Business Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 8 months ago.


Here is my violation of the consumer fraud act claim. Do you see any issues or any red flags or anythying like that? I know its a little lonmg and i understand its not formal or advice, etc, but do you see any red flags right away?


COUNT FOUR - VIOLATION OF THE NEW JERSEY CONSUMER FRAUD ACT, N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 to -20



  1. All preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference.

  2. Defendants are real estate brokers licensed by the NJ Real Estate Commission, engaged in the business of sale and rental of real estate for customers.

  3. Rental agreement between Plaintiff and tenants Negron and Ortiz, (Exhibit 7), prepared and facilitated by the Defendants, was connected to the sale and advertisement of the Plaintiff's real property (n.b., the aforementioned term, "sale," is defined by N.J.S.A. 56:8-1(c), as including, "rental or distribution, offer for sale, rental or distribution or attempt directly or indirectly to sell, rent or distribute").

  4. The rental agreement described in Paragraph (69), was prepared by the Defendants and contained Contract of Sale clause, that provided that the Defendants would be compensated by the amount of 6% of the Plaintiff property value, (or ~$36,000) if the tenants were to make an offer and execute a contract to buy the Plaintiff's property. The Contract of Sale clause required the Plaintiff to retain the Defendants as his Real Estate sales agents in a potential property sale to the tenants, and, in essence, turned the rental transaction into a contingent real estate sale transaction.

  5. Mrs. Sanzari falsely promised to Plaintiff that she will verify employment, income and credit of the applicant tenants prior to recommending of suitable tenants to Plaintiff, (which induced the Plaintiff to execute the contingent fee agreement with the Defendants to represent the Plaintiff as listing real estate brokers - Exhibit 1) and did not perform the verifications she promised.

  6. Mrs. Sanzari misrepresented to Plaintiff that she verified financial documentation provided by tenants Negron and Ortiz was false, since Mrs. Sanzari did not verify and/or perform any reasonable validation of tenants' financial information. Instead, Mrs. Sanzari admitted that she relied on the representation from the tenants' real estate broker, that tenants are suitable, which may have been false and/or had no rational basis.

  7. Mrs. Sanzari promised to Plaintiff that the tenants Negron and Ortiz will be "fabulous" and "excellent" and it turned out to be false. Tenants turned out to be major scale drug dealers who opened a drug laboratory and distribution facility at the Plaintiff's property and significantly damaged the property during its operations.

  8. Mrs. Sanzari falsely promised that the Defendants will help the Plaintiff in the manner described in the paragraph (7) and failed to provide any help whatsoever when it was discovered that the tenants conducted illegal drug manufacturing and distribution activities at the Plaintiff's property, despite several requests from Plaintiff.

  9. Plaintiff entered into a rental agreement with tenants based on a recommendation of the Defendant Mrs. Sanzari that the tenants will be "excellent".

  10. Plaintiff performed reasonable check of the financial information provided by tenants Negron and Ortiz, after the police executed a search warrant at the Plaintiff's property, using public sources of information, and in manner described by Mrs. Sanzari in paragraph (26, 27), and that revealed issues, errors and problems that indicate the provided documents do not contain correct and true information about tenants employment and income and are missing a credit of Ortiz.

  11. Upon information and belief the employment and income documents of the tenants were counterfeited and forged, as alleged in paragraph (25).

  12. Plaintiff did not know that Defendant's were misrepresenting and making false promises, and justifiably relied on it.

  13. Plaintiff had full trust in the Defendants and had no reason not to trust the Defendants.

  14. Plaintff had a full incentive to trust the Defendants' recommendations based on the representation made by the Defendant Mrs. Sanzari about qualification and experience of the Defendants, and her description of the process which the Defendants would follow (paragraph 7) to verify applicant tenants, which turned out to be false.

  15. Plaintiff executed a rental agreement with tenants without delays and without requesting a personal meeting with them, or additional checks, because he believed and relied on the promise that the tenants will be "excellent" made by the Defendant Mrs. Sanzari.

  16. Mrs. Sanzari had no reasonable, rational basis to make a representation that the tenants will be "excellent" and made it recklessly, without knowledge of to the truth and in bad faith and ill will..

  17. The absence of a rational basis to make such strong recommendation, in essence, a guarantee, implies that factors other than those relevant and requested by Plaintiff were considered. In that sense, a decision of Mrs. Sanzari to claim that she knows that the tenants "will be excellent tenants", is a representation made in irrational and arbitrary fashion, recklessly and without knowledge of the truth.

  18. Mrs. Sanzari's promise that tenants will be "excellent", material to the rental agreement transaction between Plaintiff, and Negron and Ortiz, was made for the Plaintiff to rely on it and to induce him to execute a lease with the tenants.

  19. Defendant Mrs. Sanzari intended that Plaintiff rely on its acts of unconsciousness commercial practices, false promises, misrepresentations, and concealments of material facts by renting the property to the tenants recommended by the Defendants, rather than requesting additional verifications or looking for new tenants.

  20. Defendants induced the Plaintiff to execute a rental agreement with tenants Negron and Ortiz by making affirmative misrepresentations to gain the fees, no matter what, and without regard to the Plaintiff interests.

  21. The damages to the Plaintiff were proximately caused by the Defendant's misrepresentations and false promises, as well as by their concealment of pertinent facts, since the tenants intended to use the property as heroin production and distribution facility in the first place, were trying to deceive the Defendants and Plaintiff about their true motive, and never intended to use the property as outlined in the terms of the lease executed.

  22. Defendants breached their fiduciary duties under N.J.A.C. 11:5-6.4 to Plaintiff as described in paragraphs (35), (36), (37).

  23. Defendants breached their fiduciary duties intentionally because they knew or should have known that the types of incidents that occurred with the Plaintiff's property are very rare and perceived its probability was very slim when they asserted that the tenants will be "excellent".

  24. By promising that the tenants will be excellent when the tenants turned out to be drug dealers and by misrepresenting that they verified tenants' financial information which was false, Defendants intentionally violated Code of Ethics of the National Association of Realtors, Article 2, that requires Realtors to refrain from exaggeration, misrepresentation, or concealment of pertinent facts related to the property or transaction,

  25. Defendant Mrs. Sanzari's promise "I know that they will be excellent tenants", was made to induce and did induce the Plaintiff to believe that there was a zero probably (no chance) that the negative alternative, in which tenants Negron and Ortiz would not be "excellent" and "fabulous", might exist.

  26. Defendant Mrs. Sanzari could have used any other, less convincing words (such as "I believe", or "I think") to assert the "excellent" financial qualifications of tenants to Plaintiff, as a reasonable person would do, if he did not know something to be true or had no rational and reasonable basis to believe something to be true.

  27. But Mrs Sanzari knew that less convincing representation (such as "I believe", or "I think"), if used to assert the "excellent" financial qualifications of tenants, would have informed the Plaintiff (or any reasonable person) that there was a possibility the tenants would not be "excellent", and that Mrs. Sanzari was not 100% sure about the tenants suitability. That would have prompted the Plaintiff (or any other reasonable person) to consider other facts, or to request more documents and additional information, or to insist on meeting the tenants, which was apparently what the Defendants were trying to prevent.

  28. Mrs. Sanzari used statement "I know they will be excellent tenants" to induce the Plaintiff to believe that not only Defendants verified financial information of applicant tenants, but that they perceived it to be of the highest quality and excellent financial condition, and that the chance of the tenants not being "excellent" was non-existent

  29. As a result of the Defendants' misrepresentations and false promises, the Plaintiff executed the property rental agreement with tenants (Exhibit 7) without further delay and without requesting a personal interview with tenants with tenants Negron and Ortiz.

  30. Defendants conduct was objectively deceptive and had a capacity to deceive reasonable landlord under circumstances. The facts that Mrs. Sanzari did not perform reasonable verification of the applicant tenant's financial information, or that she relied on the information provided by the tenant's real estate broker, were material facts that a reasonable and/or unsophisticated landlord would attach an importance to at the time of execution of a rental agreement with tenants.

  31. As the result of the Defendant's forgoing acts, false promises, affirmative misrepresentations, Plaintiff have suffered ascertainable loss by renting his property to the major scale drug dealers who operated a drug laboratory and distribution facility out of the Plaintiff property and in the course destroyed the plaintiff property rooms, furniture, doors, walls, etc. Plaintiff has suffered actual damages in the amount of 25,770. In addition, Plaintiff has suffered damages for lost rent to plaintiff's property, injury to plaintiff's reputation for having to demonstrate to law enforcement that the illegal activities which took place on plaintiff's property were completely unknown to plaintiff, as well as emotional injuries caused by the aftermath of having to deal with the restoration of plaintiff's property to tenantable condition, as well as damages to his health since the Plaintiff experienced a nervous breakdown that required treatment from the doctor. Total economic damages experienced by Plaintiff accounted for more than $36,000. Plaintiff is entitled to recover such damages together with appropriate penalties, including treble damages, attorney's fees, and cost of suit.


WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this Honorable Court enter Judgment in his favor and as against Defendants in the amount of $250,000.

Expert:  Zachary replied 8 months ago.
1. In paragraph 6, change "rational basis" to "factual basis" and the same throughout the rest of the claim. The issue here is not the rationale of her basis, but the fact that she did not have any facts upon which she was relying to make the representation to you that they were good tenants.

2. "Mrs. Sanzari misrepresented to Plaintiff that she verified financial documentation provided by tenants Negron and Ortiz was false" - remove "was false" as this is redundant of a misrepresentation.


Other than the above, and a few missing "a"'s and the"'s throughout, this is well written and should pass muster in court.
Zachary, Attorney
Category: Business Law
Satisfied Customers: 3638
Experience: Internationational Commercial Attorney
Zachary and other Business Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 8 months ago.

Hi i asked this question bfore - understnad that youwere on vacaion -m would you consider answearing my questions? Thanks so much

 


I have several endings - pleas for releif. Which one do you like the most and why? Which one might be more persuasive for a judge and jury? Anything i missed to state in any of them? Thanks.

case 1

  1. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants' breaches of
    their fiduciary duties, and their failure to comply with N.J.A.C. 11:5-6.4 and their failure to comply with National Association of Realtors Code of Ethics, the Plaintiff experienced actual losses and damages to his property in the amount of $25,770 in repairs, $3000 in broken art and furniture (bedroom set from the Family room was destroyed, columns and chairs broken), two months lost rent before he was able to re-lease, or $6900, two days of unearned income (since he had to take days off to supervise repairs and clear the situation and then to provide information about the tenants to the NJ State Police Narcotics Unit), or $2000, damages to his reputation and standing in his community, damages to his health (he had to urgently visit a doctor on December 22, 2012 to treat a nervous breakdown).

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this Honorable Court to enter judgment in his favor and against Defendants in the amount of $250,000.

 

Defendants’ breach of their contractual duties cost the Plaintiff more than 36,000 in damages in repairs, broken and missing art and furniture, lost rent, unearned income, as the result of what was formerly his primary residence being rented to large scale drug dealers.

 

case 3

 

  1. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants' breaches of
    their implied warrantee under N.J.A.C. 11:5-6.4, the Plaintiff experienced actual losses and damages to his property in the amount of $36,000 in repairs, damages in broken art and furniture (bedroom set from the Family room was destroyed, columns and chairs broken), two months lost rent before he was able to re-lease, two days of unearned income (since he had to take days off to supervise repairs and convince NJ State Police Narcotics Unit that he had no knowledge of the illegal activities of the tenants), damages to his reputation and standing in his community.

 

case 4

  1. As the result of the Defendant's forgoing acts, false promises, affirmative misrepresentations, Plaintiff have suffered ascertainable loss by renting his property to the major scale drug dealers who operated a drug laboratory and distribution facility out of the Plaintiff property and in the course destroyed the plaintiff property rooms, furniture, doors, walls, etc. Plaintiff has suffered actual damages in the amount of 25,770. In addition, Plaintiff has suffered damages for lost rent to plaintiff's property, injury to plaintiff's reputation for having to demonstrate to law enforcement that the illegal activities which took place on plaintiff's property were completely unknown to plaintiff, as well as emotional injuries caused by the aftermath of having to deal with the restoration of plaintiff's property to tenantable condition, as well as damages to his health since the Plaintiff experienced a nervous breakdown that required treatment from the doctor. Total economic damages experienced by Plaintiff accounted for more than $36,000. Plaintiff is entitled to recover such damages together with appropriate penalties, including treble damages, attorney's fees, and cost of suit.

JustAnswer in the News:

 
 
 
Ask-a-doc Web sites: If you've got a quick question, you can try to get an answer from sites that say they have various specialists on hand to give quick answers... Justanswer.com.
JustAnswer.com...has seen a spike since October in legal questions from readers about layoffs, unemployment and severance.
Web sites like justanswer.com/legal
...leave nothing to chance.
Traffic on JustAnswer rose 14 percent...and had nearly 400,000 page views in 30 days...inquiries related to stress, high blood pressure, drinking and heart pain jumped 33 percent.
Tory Johnson, GMA Workplace Contributor, discusses work-from-home jobs, such as JustAnswer in which verified Experts answer people’s questions.
I will tell you that...the things you have to go through to be an Expert are quite rigorous.
 
 
 

What Customers are Saying:

 
 
 
  • Mr. Kaplun clearly had an exceptional understanding of the issue and was able to explain it concisely. I would recommend JustAnswer to anyone. Great service that lives up to its promises! Gary B. Edmond, OK
< Last | Next >
  • Mr. Kaplun clearly had an exceptional understanding of the issue and was able to explain it concisely. I would recommend JustAnswer to anyone. Great service that lives up to its promises! Gary B. Edmond, OK
  • My Expert was fast and seemed to have the answer to my taser question at the tips of her fingers. Communication was excellent. I left feeling confident in her answer. Eric Redwood City, CA
  • I am very pleased with JustAnswer as a place to go for divorce or criminal law knowledge and insight. Michael Wichita, KS
  • PaulMJD helped me with questions I had regarding an urgent legal matter. His answers were excellent. Three H. Houston, TX
  • Anne was extremely helpful. Her information put me in the right direction for action that kept me legal, possible saving me a ton of money in the future. Thank you again, Anne!! Elaine Atlanta, GA
  • It worked great. I had the facts and I presented them to my ex-landlord and she folded and returned my deposit. The 50 bucks I spent with you solved my problem. Tony Apopka, FL
  • Wonderful service, prompt, efficient, and accurate. Couldn't have asked for more. I cannot thank you enough for your help. Mary C. Freshfield, Liverpool, UK
 
 
 

Meet The Experts:

 
 
 
  • Law Pro's Avatar

    Law Pro

    Attorney

    Satisfied Customers:

    1426
    20 years experience in business law - sole proprietor, partnership, and corporations
< Last | Next >
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/LA/lawpro/2012-6-25_171315_PT206740s.64x64.jpg Law Pro's Avatar

    Law Pro

    Attorney

    Satisfied Customers:

    1426
    20 years experience in business law - sole proprietor, partnership, and corporations
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/DC/DCraneEsq/2012-8-14_14436_DCrane.64x64.jpg MShore Law's Avatar

    MShore Law

    Attorney

    Satisfied Customers:

    1233
    Drafted Negotiated and/or Reviewed Thousands of Commercial Agreements
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/FL/FLAandNYLawyer/2012-1-27_14349_3Fotolia25855429M.64x64.jpg FiveStarLaw's Avatar

    FiveStarLaw

    Attorney

    Satisfied Customers:

    1162
    25 years of experience helping people like you.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/dkaplun/2009-05-17_173121_headshot_1_2.jpg Dimitry K., Esq.'s Avatar

    Dimitry K., Esq.

    Attorney

    Satisfied Customers:

    1142
    Run my own successful business/contract law practice.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/ohioatty/2009-1-22_185545_me.jpg J.Hazelbaker's Avatar

    J.Hazelbaker

    Attorney

    Satisfied Customers:

    393
    Experienced and trained in the area of business law.
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/scottymacesq/2009-6-10_221523_small.jpg RGMacEsq's Avatar

    RGMacEsq

    Attorney

    Satisfied Customers:

    393
    Licensed Texas General Practice Attorney
  • http://ww2.justanswer.com/uploads/BA/barristerinky/2012-6-10_22423_office.64x64.jpg Barrister's Avatar

    Barrister

    Attorney

    Satisfied Customers:

    301
    13 years practicing attorney, MBA