Court Opinion

ID: 9775921
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 19:12:46.3602+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:32:32.033264
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON PETITION TO REHEAR

The defendants have filed a petition to rehear in which they state that we misapprehended a material fact in our opinion. Specifically, they disagree with our assertion that Chancellor Rainwater, in the earlier suit against KRI, “found that fraudulent misrepresentations were made by KRI to Allied at the May 4 meeting.” The defendants claim that the Chancellor did not find that KRI made misrepresentations.
We have again read the Chancellor’s opinion in the KRI lawsuit. Our reading persuades us that while the Chancellor found that KRI made representations that bound it to a contract with Allied, he did not address, one way or the other, the question of whether KRI made intentional misrepresentations. Accordingly, the defendants’ petition is hereby granted for the sole purpose of correcting the following erroneous language [Editor’s Note: Change incorporated for publication purposes.]
IT IS SO ORDERED.
GODDARD, P.J., and FRANKS, J., concur.