How have courts interpreted the words "scam" and "fraud" as statements of fact?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Lifevantage Corp. v. Macfarland, A141057 (Cal. App. 2015):
(1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1355 [references to research and case studies suggested factual basis for statements].) In these circumstances, it is difficult to accept his argument that his statements are nonactionable opinion because "[t]hey are not phrased as mere impressions." (Hawran v. Hixson, supra, 209 Cal.App.4th at p. 291.)
C. The Words "Scam" and "Fraud" May Be Construed as Statements of Fact.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
How have courts interpreted section 1016.5 of the California Immigration Code and how have the courts interpreted the word 'court' in that section? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts interpreted the facts in our statement of facts in the context of a sexual assault case? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts interpreted the prosecutor's statement that the jury's verdict must be based on the evidence presented in court? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted or interpreted the word "or" and "and" in legislation? (California, United States of America)
Can a defense interpreter only interpret words of the witness interpreter at trial? (California, United States of America)
How will the Court of Appeal interpret the implied findings of fact made by a trial court in support of an order? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts interpreted a statement of facts in a motion for class certification? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 1018 of the California Criminal Code when a defendant makes a statement in open court that authorizes or adopts a motion to withdraw his plea? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted a statement of facts derived from a preconviction report? (California, United States of America)
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)
