GREYCAS, INC. V. PROUD
826 F.2d 1560 (1987)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Proud (D) appealed a judgment in favor of Greycas (P) for P's claim
for negligent misrepresentation.
FACTS: D practices law. D's brother-in-law, Wayne Crawford, a lawyer, owned a large
farm. The farm fell on hard times and Crawford was in dire financial straits. Most of his
farm machinery was pledged to lenders. Crawford approached P seeking a large loan that he
offered to secure with the farm machinery. P obtained several appraisals but did not
investigate Crawford's financial position or discover that he had pledged the collateral to
other lenders, who had perfected their liens in the collateral. P agreed to lend Crawford
$1,367,966.50, which was less than the appraised value of the machinery. Crawford was
required to submit a letter to P, from counsel whom he would retain, assuring P that there
were no prior liens on the machinery that was to secure the loan. Crawford asked D to
prepare the letter, and he did so, and mailed it to P. The loan closed and Crawford
defaulted on the loan and committed suicide. P learned that most of the farm machinery had
previously been pledged to other lenders. P has been able to recover only a small part of
the loan. P sued D for the deficiency. The letter typed on the stationery of D's firm and
addressed to P identifies D as Crawford's lawyer and states that, 'in such capacity, I have
been asked to render my opinion in connection with' the proposed loan to Crawford. It also
states that 'this opinion is being delivered in accordance with the requirements of the Loan
Agreement' and that I have conducted a U.C.C., tax, and judgment search with respect to the
Company [i.e., Crawford's farm] as of March 19, 1981, and except as hereinafter noted all
units listed on the attached Exhibit A ('Equipment') are free and clear of all liens or
encumbrances other than Lender's perfected security interest therein which was recorded
March 19, 1981 at the Office of the Recorder of Deeds of Fayette County, Illinois. D never
conducted a search for prior liens on the machinery. Crawford gave him the list and told him
there were no liens other than the one that Crawford had just filed for P. P sued D for
negligent misrepresentation. D claimed he owed no duty to P. The court ruled for P and D
appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment