[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Reasonableness of reliance is always an issue for the jury (proving reasonable reliance is one of the elements of the tort), but is relatively easy to overcome in a situation where a purported expert makes a material representation of fact supposedly based on his thorough investigation of the facts. In this case it would be less of an issue because the basic cause of action would be rescission, which could be for misrepresentation or material mistake. If the card isn't unique, the materiality of the mistake is apparent.