CIV § 1709

Liable for damage from willful deceit: CIV § 1709

California Civil Code § 1709 makes anyone who willfully deceives another to alter their position to their injury or risk liable for any damage suffered.

Official text CIV § 1709 — California

One who willfully deceives another with intent to induce him to alter his position to his injury or risk, is liable for any damage which he thereby suffers.

Text as published in the 2026 snapshot of the code.

Source: Vaquill Open US Law, compiled from official state publishers (huggingface.co), reproduced under license CC BY 4.0.

Read this provision at the official source →

What it actually says

Section 1709 states the tort of deceit in one sentence: one who willfully deceives another, with intent to induce him to alter his position to his injury or risk, is liable for any damage which he thereby suffers. Its importance is where it sits. Unlike § 1572, which defines actual fraud as something done by a party to a contract, this section is a tort under the heading of obligations arising without contract — so it reaches the person who was never a party to any agreement with you at all: the agent, the inspector, the introducer, the friend of the seller.

Every phrase is an element. "Willfully deceives" excludes an honest mistake. "With intent to induce him to alter his position" ties the deceit to the purpose of getting you to act. "To his injury or risk" is broader than it looks — the intent may be to expose you to risk, not only to certain loss. And "any damage which he thereby suffers" makes causation part of the claim: the loss must flow from the altered position, which is the requirement usually described as reliance.

The section is short because the substance is next door. Section 1710 defines what a deceit is — the four kinds, including suppression of a fact by one bound to disclose it, and a promise made without any intention of performing. Section 3343 supplies the measure of damages where the deceit concerned the purchase, sale or exchange of property. Whether particular conduct was willful rather than careless, and whether you altered your position because of it, are evidential questions to take to a lawyer.

When it applies

A seller's agent who assured you of something they knew to be false
A person who was not a party to the contract but talked you into it
A mechanic or inspector who concealed a defect they had found
An introducer paid to bring you into a deal on false information
A recommendation made to get you to commit money
Someone who exposed you to a risk they concealed, even though it has not yet cost you

What this section does not say

It does not cover an honest mistake. The deception must be willful; a person who was wrong and believed what they said is not within this section.
It is not confined to contracts. That is its point — deceit under this section can be committed by someone who was never a party to any agreement with you.
It does not define deceit. The four categories, including concealment and a promise made without intention to perform, are in § 1710.
It does not measure the loss. Where the deceit concerned the purchase, sale or exchange of property, § 3343 supplies an out-of-pocket measure rather than the general tort rule.
It does not remove the need to show you acted on it. The damage must be suffered "thereby", so a lie you did not rely on does not sustain the claim.

Worked examples

Invented situations, written to show how the wording bites. They are not real cases, not judgments and not precedent, and nothing here predicts what would happen in yours.

Illustrative example

A buyer asks an agent at a viewing whether the roof has been replaced and is told it was done two years ago. It had not been, and the agent had read the survey saying so.

How the wording applies

Section 1709 reaches a person who was never a party to the contract, which is why it is the provision for an agent rather than section 1572. It turns on willfulness: an agent repeating what the seller said without knowing better is in a different position from one who had read the survey and said the opposite.

How the parties settled it

The agency contributes an agreed sum towards the roof works without admission, paid on production of the contractor's invoice, and the buyer makes no further claim against the agency.

Illustrative example

Someone pays for a pre-purchase inspection on a used vehicle. The inspector notices a repaired structural weld, says nothing about it, and the buyer goes ahead.

How the wording applies

Concealment of a fact by someone bound to disclose it is deceit under sections 1709 and 1710, and the loss must have been suffered thereby. The fact the answer turns on is reliance, meaning whether the buyer would have walked away had the weld been reported, which is where a contemporaneous message about the inspection matters far more than anything said afterwards.

How the parties settled it

The inspector refunds the inspection fee and pays an agreed contribution towards the difference in value, and the buyer keeps the vehicle.

How courts have read it

Decisions construing this provision. The question and the summary are ours; the quoted sentence is the court's own words, taken from the published opinion. These are the decisions in our corpus, not every decision there is, and nothing here predicts any other case. Reported 1991 to 2017.

Beckwith v. Dahl, 205 Cal. App. 4th 1039 (2012)

Court of Appeal

What the court had to decide

Did Beckwith's complaint allege sufficient facts to support a cause of action for deceit by false promise under Civil Code section 1709?

What it held

Yes, the complaint alleged sufficient facts to support a claim for deceit, so the trial court erred in sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend as to that cause of action.

In the court's words

We conclude Beckwith’s complaint alleged sufficient facts to support a claim for deceit, but there are currently insufficient facts stated to allege IIEI.

Source: Caselaw Access Project, CC0 1.0 Universal (public domain dedication).

Related sections

CIV § 1710 4 kinds of deceit under CIV § 1710 CIV § 1572 Actual fraud: 5 types under California CIV § 1572 CIV § 3343 CIV § 3343: Out-of-pocket difference + additional damages CIV § 1708 No contract needed: CIV § 1708 duty to not injure

That's the law. Now let's settle your problem.

Say what is happening. A neutral mediator hears your side and the other party's, and walks you both to a written agreement. In the advanced settings you can ask for the decision to be reasoned on the California Codes.

This is with

Or open a session directly and invite the other party.

We copy this text from the official publisher and re-check it against that source on every page load, but we cannot guarantee it is complete, current or free of error, and we accept no liability for any reliance on it. An amendment can take effect before a consolidation catches up. The publisher's own copy is linked below; where the two differ, it is the official one that counts.

This page reproduces the text of CIV § 1709 in force at the date shown and explains it in general terms. It is not legal advice and takes no account of the circumstances of your case, which can change the answer completely. For a live dispute, for limitation periods, and before taking any step in court, consult a qualified lawyer in California.

← All California law pages