Maryland
How Feld v. Henry S. Levy & Sons, Inc. applies in Maryland: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Other.
Maryland law recognizes commercial misrepresentation and imposes liability on defendants who knowingly make false representations that induce reliance by others. The court generally looks to the intent of the party making the representation and the resulting reliance by the plaintiff.
In Maryland, to establish a claim for misrepresentation, a plaintiff must show that the defendant made a false representation that was intended to induce reliance, and the plaintiff did indeed rely on that representation to their detriment.
The court held that even non-promissory statements could result in liability for misrepresentation when they induce reliance, demonstrating the need for accuracy in representations.
The court clarified that while opinions generally do not constitute fraud, if an opinion is stated in a misleading context, it can lead to liability.
The ruling affirmed that a party's failure to disclose key information can constitute misrepresentation when there is a duty to disclose.
Maryland's approach to misrepresentation closely aligns with federal principles, particularly in requiring an intent to deceive. However, Maryland places substantial emphasis on the duty to disclose in fiduciary relationships, which can diverge from general federal interpretations that may not impose such strict duties.
Questions on Maryland's interpretation of misrepresentation, especially regarding intentionality and reliance, frequently appear on the Maryland bar exam, highlighting the importance of understanding state-specific nuances.