Court Opinion

ID: 9710749
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 04:16:43.552847+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:59.662642
License: Public Domain

SUPPLEMENT TO OPINION UPON DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REHEARING  In his petition for rehearing plaintiff, correctly points out that mere compliance with formal statutory requirements do not shield a wrongdoer from liability for fraud. In the discussion in the first full paragraph on page 9 of the opinion the court, inadvertently, failed to state that the evidence, prima facie, also met the requirement that defendant prove the sale price to have been fair, reasonable and adequate. Despite the contention made in the petition, this court did not reach or decide the question of whether the $5,000 payment to Brown was a gift or a bribe, or as the petition terms it, “legitimate promotion expenses.” A determination of this issue was not necessary to the decision of the case and any further discussion of the nature of the transaction would be dictum. The court is not aware of any innuendoes with respect to the plaintiff, and the statement of which plaintiff complains is fully supported by the record. The petition for rehearing is denied.