Shawn Stevens v. Markirk Construction, Inc., and Kirk Jones

Summary

The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed a judgment for the defendants in a fraudulent misrepresentation action arising from the sale of a subdivision lot. The Court held that a representation that the lot "would not flood" concerned a future event rather than an existing fact, so the plaintiff was required to prove that the defendant knew the representation was false when made. The trial court therefore properly instructed the jury on the applicable scienter standard.

Holdings

1. The phrase "would not flood" is a prediction or representation concerning a future event, not a representation of an existing fact.
2. To establish fraud based on a representation concerning a future event or future performance, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant knew the representation was false when made, meaning that the defendant did not intend to perform the promised act or did not believe the predicted event would occur.
3. The trial court did not err in instructing the jury that Jones had to know the representation was false at the time it was made.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the statement that Lot 335 "would not flood" was a representation of an existing fact or a prediction or promise concerning a future event.
2. Whether the trial court properly required the jury to find that Jones knew the representation was false when made, rather than merely that Jones made it without knowing whether it was true or false.

Disposition

affirmed