Cruze v. Hudler

Attorney Markley (defendant), a business partner of developer Hudler (defendant) in interconnected real-estate companies, prepared documents containing material misrepresentations that Hudler used to induce Cruze (plaintiff) to invest over $3.5 million in what turned out to be a Ponzi-type scheme; Markley never personally made misrepresentations to Cruze, but Cruze alleged Markley knew of Hudler's fraud, and the trial court granted Markley summary judgment for lack of direct misrepresentation.