Parol Evidence Rule (Implied)

40 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Eastmount Constr. Co. & Am. Sur. Co. v. Transp. Mfg. & Equip. Co.
  301 F.2d 34· 8th Cir.· 1962-03-14 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a subcontract's ambiguity regarding the quantity of topsoil required the admission of extrinsic evidence to determine the parties' intent, and that interest was properly awarded on the liquidated amount due.
• Fairbanks v. Consol. Fisheries Co.
  190 F.2d 817· 3d Cir.· 1951-07-09 ·cited 34×
  The court held that descriptive language in a contract specification constitutes an express warranty and that disclaimer clauses did not negate this warranty, nor did a written acceptance for installation waive the breach of warranty claim. The court also held that a disclaimer c
• Jacksonville Paper Co. v. The Smith & Winchester Mfg. Co.
  147 Fla. 311· Fla.· 1941-05-27 ·cited 33×
  Smith & Winchester Manufacturing Company sued Jacksonville Paper Company in replevin to recover custom-built machinery that the buyer refused to pay for and return. The Florida Supreme Court addressed whether the sale was 'on approval' (title retained by seller) or 'sale or retur
• The Franklin Co. v. The United States
  381 F.2d 416· Ct. Cl.· 1967-07-20 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the contract did not obligate the government to assign all work within enumerated equipment types to the plaintiff, but rather to make a good faith effort to assign work customarily performed at the plaintiff's depot, consistent with past practice and the dual
• Century Ref. Co. v. Hall
  316 F.2d 15· 10th Cir.· 1963-03-14 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court correctly submitted to the jury the question of whether the parties intended to include direct sales to specified dealers in calculating the refund under the original contract, and affirmed the judgment on that claim. The court also affirmed th
• H. B. Zachry Co. v. O'Brien
  378 F.2d 423· 10th Cir.· 1967-05-12 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the memorandum, along with the addendum and surrounding circumstances, constituted a binding contract, and the superintendent had apparent authority to bind the company.
• Max Drill, Inc. v. The United States
  427 F.2d 1233· Ct. Cl.· 1970-06-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the government contract was ambiguous regarding the painting of wood sashes, and the contractor's reasonable interpretation, confirmed by the technical representative, should be upheld.
• All-Dixie Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Moffatt
  212 So. 2d 347· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-07-09 ·cited 18×
  All-Dixie Insurance Agency appealed a trial court decision regarding a disputed insurance business purchase agreement with W. J. Moffatt. The key dispute concerned whether certain policies constituted 'brokerage business' excluded from the purchase price under the contract's clea
• Brown v. Bowie
  58 Fla. 199· Fla.· 1909-06-01 ·cited 18×
  Brown and Bowie were competitive bidders on a warehouse construction project who entered into a written agreement to award each other specified portions of work if either won the main contract. Bowie won the contract and a dispute arose over settlement calculations, with the tria
• Plymouth Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Ill. Mid-Continent Life Ins. Co. of Chicago
  378 F.2d 389· 3d Cir.· 1967-05-09 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the phrase 'of the Norman Reitman & Co.' in the settlement agreement was descriptive, not a limitation, and thus the adjuster's report was valid despite his departure from the named firm.
• Gibbs v. Am. Nat'l Bank OF Jacksonville
  155 So. 2d 651· Fla. 1st DCA· 1963-05-28 ·cited 16×
  A guaranty agreement covering both existing and future indebtedness is supported by valid consideration, and a defendant's vague deposition testimony is insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment.
• Megarry Bros., Inc. v. United States
  404 F.2d 479· 8th Cir.· 1968-12-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in submitting the existence of an oral contract for insulation to the jury, but erred in admitting testimony about settlement negotiations.
• Coen v. Am. Sur. Co. of N.Y.
  120 F.2d 393· 8th Cir.· 1941-06-09 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge holds that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant and that the case should have been submitted to the jury.
• Oswald v. Allen
  417 F.2d 43· 2d Cir.· 1969-10-14 ·cited 10×
• Vargas v. Esquire, Inc.
  166 F.2d 651· 7th Cir.· 1948-02-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a fiduciary relationship and that the evidence did not support claims of fraud or deception in the procurement of the contract.
• Jacksonville Newspaper Printing Pressmen & Assistants' Union NO. 57 v. Fla. Publ'g Co.
  468 F.2d 824· 5th Cir.· 1972-10-26 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement regarding arbitration board composition and the existence of a parol agreement are matters for the arbitration committee, not the court.
• Hoston v. The J. R. Watkins Co.
  300 F.2d 869· 9th Cir.· 1962-03-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present a triable issue of fact regarding an alleged oral contract, and the written agreement, along with related documents, constituted the complete contract.
• Owens v. Clow Corp.
  491 F.2d 101· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the written proposal and invoice, along with oral agreement for delivery, constituted an enforceable contract under the UCC, and the issue of mitigation of damages was a jury question.
• United States for the Use & Benefit of Astro Cleaning & Packaging Corp. v. Jamison Co., Inc.
  425 F.2d 1281· 6th Cir.· 1970-05-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Astro was entitled to damages for one week of delay due to its failure to provide timely notice as required by the subcontract, and that Astro was entitled to interest on the contract balance.
• In re Abc-Federal OIL & Burner Co., Inc.
  290 F.2d 886· 3d Cir.· 1961-04-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that no binding contract was formed because essential terms remained unresolved, but the bankrupt estate was entitled to restitution for improvements made to the other party's property.
• Rode & Brand v. Kamm Games, Inc.
  181 F.2d 584· 2d Cir.· 1950-04-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendants breached the contract by refusing to accept and pay for the goods, as the goods complied with the contract's intended specifications and the defendants failed to timely assert any noncompliance.
• Rowe v. Chesapeake Mineral Co.
  156 F.2d 752· 6th Cir.· 1946-07-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the term 'mineral' in a deed, under Kentucky law, includes oil and gas, and a purchaser for value without notice is entitled to rely on the recorded deed, even if the grantor's intent was otherwise but not reflected in the record.
• Hosp. Correspondence Corp. v. McRAE
  682 So. 2d 1177· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-11-08 ·cited 4×
  Hospital Correspondence Corporation appealed a partial summary judgment finding it liable for overcharging patients for medical records copies made from microfilm and microfiche sources. The court affirmed that Florida law required charging only $1 per page for paper copies regar
• Betty LEE Shoes, Inc. v. Karl's Shoe Stores, Ltd.
  293 F.2d 429· 5th Cir.· 1961-07-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the writings did not constitute an enforceable contract because essential terms were not agreed upon, and the Statute of Frauds applied to the employment agreement.
• Pekovich v. Coughlin
  258 F.2d 191· 9th Cir.· 1958-07-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's interpretation of the ambiguous contract, based on the parties' conduct and intent, was supported by the evidence, but modified the attorney's fee award.
• Hoss v. C. G. (Jim) Purinton
  229 F.2d 104· 9th Cir.· 1955-12-21 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the judgment against Hoss individually should be reversed because his liability was based on a contract that was not alleged or found to have been made by him individually.
• LEE E. Morris, Inc. v. United States
  219 F.2d 541· 10th Cir.· 1955-02-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the ambiguous subcontract's terms, when read in light of preliminary negotiations, meant the general contractor would cover costs exceeding $20,000, but not supervision or equipment costs.
• Entre Computer Ctrs., Inc. v. FMG OF Kan. City, Inc.
  819 F.2d 1279· 4th Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the denial of a new trial on breach of contract claims was an abuse of discretion due to excessive damages awarded by the jury.
• Maljamar OIL & GAS Corp. v. Malco Refineries, Inc.
  155 F.2d 673· 10th Cir.· 1946-05-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the writings constituted a valid and enforceable contract obligating the buyer to pay a fixed price for oil, and that this contract was not barred by the statute of frauds under either New York or New Mexico law.
• Credithrift, Inc. v. Knowles
  556 So. 2d 775· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-02-08 ·cited 1×
  A subordination clause in a mortgage that conditions subordination on substitution of collateral is ambiguous when the clauses are mutually dependent and must be interpreted together, permitting the trier of fact to resolve conflicting evidence; furthermore, a junior mortgagee's
• Fertilizantes Tocantins S.A. v. TGO Agric. (USA) Inc.
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-02-06
  The court denied both parties' motions for summary judgment, finding genuine disputes of material fact regarding contract formation under the CISG.
• Vidal v. Liquidation Props., Inc.
  127 So. 3d 541· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-10-31
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment foreclosure in favor of Liquidation Properties, holding that Liquidation failed to establish standing to foreclose because it did not prove ownership of the note as of the complaint filing date. The court also revers
• In re Newport Plaza Assocs., L.P. v. Durfee Attleboro Bank
  985 F.2d 640· 1st Cir.· 1993-02-16
  A subsequent written contract that directly contradicts and supersedes a prior oral agreement is enforceable, and the parties' intent is determined by the unambiguous language of the written contract.
• Beverly Enters., Inc. v. Fredonia Haven, Inc.
  825 F.2d 374· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-25
  The court held that Beverly's part performance of the oral lease agreement, evidenced by increased rent and assumption of costs, removed the agreement from the Statute of Frauds, making it binding despite not being signed by Fredonia.
• Crawford v. Kemmons Wilson
  693 F.2d 606· 6th Cir.· 1982-11-24
  The court held that the district court's interpretation of the stock purchase agreement's warranty and set-off provisions, which denied the buyer a set-off based on book value at closing, was reasonable and not clearly erroneous.
• Boaters Paradise, Inc. v. Freburn Corp.
  256 So. 2d 68· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-12-07
  Boaters Paradise, Inc., a commercial tenant and assignee, challenged a summary judgment requiring it to pay increased ad valorem taxes under a lease clause with Freburn Corporation, the landlord. The Florida appellate court reversed because genuine issues of material fact regardi
• Albertha Rudy McKEE v. Hassebroek
  337 F.2d 310· 10th Cir.· 1964-10-21
  Title to jointly owned savings bonds passed to the surviving wife under the terms of the bonds and Treasury Regulations, not under the husband's will.
• Ayers v. Kidney
  333 F.2d 812· 6th Cir.· 1964-06-30
  An insurance policy's clear exclusionary endorsement cannot be overridden by an agent's oral statements or a certificate of insurance that omits limitations.
• Braxton v. Sterling Holloway & Sun Valley Lodge, Inc.
  246 F.2d 953· 5th Cir.· 1957-08-08
  The court held that the contract was for personal services, terminated upon the decedent's death, and that a subsequent release executed by the decedent's widow was valid and barred any claims.
• Shinn v. Eagle-Picher Mining & Smelting Co.
  172 F.2d 717· 8th Cir.· 1949-02-23
  The court held that the plaintiff's execution of a general release, in consideration for a new royalty agreement, effectively discharged all prior claims, including the one based on the Urschel agreement, as the release was unambiguous and supported by substantial evidence.