Opinion ID: 1493954
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Record Regarding the Fraudulent Misrepresentation Claim

Text: [¶ 19] MECA's claim of fraudulent misrepresentation requires proof by clear and convincing evidence (1) that [Gorman] made a false representation (2) of a material fact (3) with knowledge of its falsity or in reckless disregard of whether it is true or false (4) for the purpose of inducing [MECA] to act in reliance upon it, and (5) [MECA] justifiably relied upon the representation as true and acted upon it to [its] damage. Mariello, 667 A.2d at 590 (quoting Guiggey v. Bombardier, 615 A.2d 1169, 1173 (Me.1992)). Evidence is clear and convincing if the factfinder could reasonably have been persuaded that the required findings were proved to be highly probable. Id. (quotation marks omitted). [¶ 20] Gorman argues only that MECA failed to establish, applying either burden of proof, the final element of fraudulent misrepresentationthat MECA justifiably relied on her representations to its detriment. [¶ 21] There is evidence in the record that could support a finding that MECA relied on Gorman's representations. MECA witnesses testified that MECA did not seek any other buyers after it obtained Gorman's assurance that she intended to purchase the practice; it prepared to lease out the remaining space in its building; it allowed Gorman continued access to patient files; and it advertised Gorman's new practice. This conduct could persuade the court, by clear and convincing evidence, that MECA relied on Gorman's representations that she would purchase the practice and its assets. [¶ 22] Regarding whether MECA's reliance on Gorman's representations was justified, the record is less compelling, but nonetheless warrants remand. Because the court found that MECA provided the more credible evidence, we conclude that it would be possible for the court to find, by clear and convincing evidence, that MECA justifiably relied on Gorman's conduct. We cannot determine from the current record whether, in applying the appropriate burden of proof, the court would find that MECA justifiably relied on Gorman's representations or that it suffered a detriment by relying on her representations. In these circumstances, we remand the matter to the trial court for it to make factual findings applying the clear and convincing evidence burden of proof.