This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Vokes (P), at age 51, decided to become an accomplished dancer. P was led to believe that she had the poise and grace to become an accomplished dancer. By flattery, cajolery, and awards, P was convinced to sign up for $31,000 worth of dancing lessons from Arthur Murray (D). The sale was constantly reinforced by D's employees; she was a promising student who was quickly becoming capable of a career as a professional dancer. P brought an action to cancel the unused portion of the 2,300 hours of lessons she had contracted for. In her complaint, P alleged that she had attained little or no skill as a dancer, had no aptitude to become a professional dancer, that D's employees had purposefully misrepresented her skills, that D's employees had taken unconscionable advantage of her, and that P had relied upon D's employees’ superior knowledge to access her ability to become a professional dancer. D contended that their representations were mere sales and trade puffery and therefore were not actionable as opinion. P's complaint was dismissed with prejudice. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.