Fraud is notoriously difficult to plead, and in part due to the requirement that the plaintiff establish and prove actual damages resulting from the fraud - real, measurable, financial ("monetary") damages. Her ability (or more likely, inability) to prove damages as a result of the fraudulent scheme will likely be fatal to her claim for fraud on a motion to dismiss. However, she may have a claim for IIED (intentional infliction of emotional distress), but there again she faces pleading and proving the difficult elements of an IIED claim, namely, the "extremity" of the shock and the "severity" of the resulting damage. Lying to someone about who they are to goad or keep them in a relationship certainly SOUNDS a lot more like IIED than a fraud claim; however, failure to prove damages is fraud's #1 nemesis, and, I surmise, the same would be true for your friend despite the objective and apparent unfairness of the situation.
Attention: This e-mail originates from the law firm of CARTER PEK, P.C. ("The Firm"). All information appearing herein is protected and regarded as confidential, and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s) indicated above. Be advised that if the reader of this message is not in fact the intended recipient, notice is hereby given that any dissemination, distribution and/or copying of this message is strictly prohibited and punishable by law. If you have received this message in error, kindly reply to sender forthwith, and destroy and purge any and all copies of such message, whether in paper, digital or other media format. If you are not an existing client of The Firm, do not construe anything in this message to cause you to become a client of The Firm, unless it contains a specific statement to that effect, and refrain from disclosing any sensitive information in which you have an expectation of privacy and/or confidence if sending a reply. contains a specific statement to that effect, and be careful not to disclose any sensitive information in reply that you expect to hold in confidence. If you are the intended recipient hereof and are a client, co-counsel or retained expert of The Firm, be mindful to maintain its contents in strict confidence in order to preserve any and all privileges, including the attorney-client and/or work product privileges that may apply. Thank you. IRC 230 Disclosure: In accordance with Internal Revenue Code 230, The Firm hereby advises you that, unless otherwise expressly stated, any reference made to or discussion of a federal tax issue contained in this message, or in any attachment(s) hereto, are neither intended nor permitted to be used for purposes of avoiding federal tax penalties.
The answer is maybe. It is definitely a bad situation and sounds like a "made for tv" movie plot, but whether or not is is a good case depends on what damages there are, if any, how sympathetic a witness your friend may be, whether or not the guy took any of her property (also part of damages) and most of all, what the guy has, if anything, to pay a verdict if she gets one. If you were talking about a celebrity defendant with a deep pocket and non-judgmentproof assets, then it could appear to be a fantastic case (poor innocent young woman gives up ten years of her life for a man who turned out to be a total fraud). But think about it. Even with the deception,
can she prove that her life would have been financially different during those ten years? She was a consenting adult and wouldn't, presumably have stayed with the guy so long if he was a monster. He was just a liar. That could be seen as just a little bit worse or even better than some messy breakups without the lying. It is certainly worth going to a PI lawyer for a consult.
This answer is not intended to be legal advice in a lawyer/client relationship. Misunderstanding of the answer or use of the answer for any illegal purpose is not the responsibility of the writer. The answer to any question in the Avvo website is constrained by the limited content of the question, an incomplete description of the facts underlying the question or a wrongful motivation for the question.
In this case probably YES.
He asked her to "marry" him and she "relied"
on that information to her detriment (damages).
He couldn't fulfill his promise as he was already
THIS ANSWER IS PURELY FOR ACADEMIC DISCUSSION ONLY AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE ANY TYPE OF LEGAL ADVICE OR LEGAL REPRESENTATION.
What this man did was unethical. It sounds like she may have justifiably relied on his representation and this may have harmed her financially. Here is the big question: how much money does this man have? If he is wealthy, this might be a good lawsuit. I am available for a free initial consultation.
Attorney at Law
If you are seeking legal advice, you should contact an attorney. Neither use of the information on this page nor an email to this office establishes an attorney-client relationship. Such relationship can only be established by an express agreement.