Parol Evidence Rule

2,396 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• COE v. COE
  352 So. 2d 559· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-11-30 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the husband failed to prove either that the parties intended alimony to terminate when the child entered school or that there had been a substantial change in circumstances justifying modification.
• In re Amex-Protein Dev. Corp. v. Plant Reclamation
  504 F.2d 1056· 9th Cir.· 1974-09-19 ·cited 19×
  A promissory note containing language that ties the security interest to specific personal property, when read in conjunction with a financing statement, can satisfy the requirements of a security agreement under the Uniform Commercial Code.
• Marbury-Pattillo Constr. Co., Inc. v. Bayside Warehouse Co.
  490 F.2d 155· 5th Cir.· 1974-02-25 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the denial of a change of venue was not an abuse of discretion and that the admission of parol evidence was permissible to determine the parties' intent regarding the contract's scope and Bayside's justification for withholding payment.
• In re Est. of Maude L. Wood v. The LEE Cnty. Bank
  226 So. 2d 46· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-08-13 ·cited 19×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed an order interpreting Maude L. Wood's will, holding that the named devisees in paragraph Fifth should take the estate rather than the heirs at law, despite the will's failure to address succession when the testator's husband predeceas
• Brown & Root, Inc. v. Gifford-Hill & Co., Inc.
  319 F.2d 65· 5th Cir.· 1963-06-19 ·cited 19×
  The court held that an oral promise to pay the debt of a third person, which constitutes a guaranty rather than a primary obligation, is unenforceable under the Louisiana statute of frauds.
• Asphalt Paving, Inc. v. Lennie L. Ulery
  149 So. 2d 370· Fla. 1st DCA· 1963-01-29 ·cited 19×
  Asphalt Paving, Inc. appeals from a judgment in favor of the widow and children of Crawford E. Ulery, who sought subrogation rights to life insurance proceeds after Ulery assigned two policies to Westfield Corporation and Orr & Company as collateral for Asphalt's debts. The appel
• State of Fla. ex rel. Rivers Buford v. Earle E. Carley
  89 Fla. 361· Fla.· 1925-04-15 ·cited 19×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the validity of a special act incorporating the Town of Belleair Heights despite allegations that the legislature could not have physically read all bills by sections during the night session when it supposedly passed. The court held that legislat
• Hollingsworth v. Wm. Handcock and Rigdon Brown
  7 Fla. 338· Fla.· 1857-03-01 ·cited 19×
  Hollingsworth sought to redeem a slave named Harriet that he had transferred to Handcock via bill of sale with an unexecuted written condition allowing redemption within one year. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decree, holding that the transaction constitute
• Petit Paul Dorestin and Jeannette K. Dorestin v. Hollywood Imports, Inc.
  45 So. 3d 819· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-08-11 ·cited 18×
  The Dorestins purchased a vehicle from Maroone Honda after participating in fraud by falsifying employment information on a credit application. A jury found Maroone liable for fraudulent inducement and FDUTPA violations, but the trial court entered judgment notwithstanding the ve
• Nu-Vision, LLC v. Corporate Convenience, Inc.
  965 So. 2d 232· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-09-07 ·cited 18×
  Nu-Vision sought certiorari review of an order dissolving a lis pendens filed on commercial real estate based on a purported option to purchase. The court held that Nu-Vision's December 16, 2004 letter could not support a claim for specific performance as a matter of law because
• MAY v. Sessums & Mason, P.A.
  700 So. 2d 22· Fla. 2d DCA· 1997-08-22 ·cited 18×
  Carol Ann May contests an award of $564,500 in "additional fees" to her former attorney, Sessums & Mason, P.A., while Sessums cross-appeals the trial court's rejection of its claim for $1,000,000. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that the fee agreement's permissive l
• In re Est. OF Frances L. Barry v. Lieberman
  689 So. 2d 1186· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-03-12 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment for the beneficiary of an irrevocable inter vivos trust, rejecting heirs' claims that an alleged oral agreement not to sue was a condition of the trust's creation. The court held that the clear, unambiguous tru
• Sunchase Apts. v. Sunbelt Serv. Corp.
  596 So. 2d 119· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-03-16 ·cited 18×
  Sunchase Apartments sought review of a summary judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action where the trial court ruled in favor of Sunbelt Service Corporation on both the foreclosure claim and rejected Sunchase's counterclaim for fraud-based rescission and reformation. The appellat
• Wash. Hosp. & S. Hills Health Sys. & All Saints Hosp. & Lock Haven Hosp. & Andrew Kaul Mem'l Hosp. (Intervenor in D.C.) v. White
  889 F.2d 1294· 3d Cir.· 1989-11-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the 1983 stipulation is ambiguous regarding whether it 'grandfathered' a 'new construction' exception to Medicaid reimbursement regulations, requiring remand for factual determination of the parties' intent.
• McDONNELL Douglas Fin. Corp. v. Pa. Power & Light Co.
  858 F.2d 825· 2d Cir.· 1988-09-16 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the arbitration clause in the contract was narrow and did not encompass disputes regarding the utility's good faith in seeking redemption, only tax-related computations.
• Wimbledon Townhouse Condo. I v. Wolfson
  510 So. 2d 1106· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-08-05 ·cited 18×
  The Wimbledon Townhouse Condominium Association appealed the involuntary dismissal of its counterclaim to foreclose a lien for roof replacement assessments. The trial court erroneously excluded evidence of board approval and ratification of the assessment and granted an involunta
• Bone v. Refco, Inc.
  774 F.2d 235· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that prejudgment interest was properly awarded on Refco's liquidated counterclaim, but reversed the judgment on Bone's claims due to the erroneous admission of parol evidence regarding lost profits, requiring a new trial.
• Mo-Kan Teamsters Pension Fund v. Creason
  716 F.2d 772· 10th Cir.· 1983-09-06 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a contract stipulation binding an employer to a collective bargaining agreement and its subsequent modifications, renewals, and extensions is enforceable, even if the employer later claims oral assurances modified its terms or that the union lacked majority su
• Watkins v. Petro-Search, Inc.
  689 F.2d 537· 5th Cir.· 1982-10-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the contract unambiguously did not require replacement of a failed well, and extrinsic evidence did not prove such an agreement.
• Lexine Perdue v. ROY Stone Transfer Corp.
  690 F.2d 1091· 4th Cir.· 1982-10-05 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the dismissal for lack of jurisdiction due to the absence of a right-to-sue letter, arguing the EEOC should have been joined as a party.
• Outlaw v. Lawrn F. McMICHAEL
  397 So. 2d 1009· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-05-05 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint with prejudice because the grounds raised were either insufficient for dismissal or constituted affirmative defenses not properly addressed at the dismissal stage.
• Sterling J. Planck, Sr. v. Traders Diversified, Inc.
  387 So. 2d 440· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-08-13 ·cited 18×
  A real estate broker sued a seller for a commission on the sale of property during the term of a listing agreement. The court reversed the trial judgment, holding that a typed limitation in the agreement restricting the broker's authority to finding a purchaser named Phillip Slac
• Action Fire Safety Equip., Inc. v. Biscayne Fire Equip. Co., Inc.
  383 So. 2d 969· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-05-27 ·cited 18×
  Biscayne Fire Equipment sued former general manager Frank Falsetti and his company Action Fire Safety Equipment to enforce a non-compete agreement. The trial court entered judgment for Biscayne based on a jury verdict, but the appellate court reversed and remanded regarding the t
• Transp. Indem. Co. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
  620 F.2d 1368· 9th Cir.· 1980-05-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the insurance policy exclusion for vehicles used in a joint venture applied, and that the vehicle involved was a non-owned automobile used in such a venture, thus denying coverage. The court also affirmed coverage for certain individuals under the policy.
• Deal Farms, Inc. v. Farm & Ranch Supply, Inc.
  382 So. 2d 888· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-04-30 ·cited 18×
  Deal Farms, Inc. and Charles Allen appealed a judgment dismissing their suit against Farm & Ranch Supply, Inc. for delivery of farm equipment allegedly differing from what was ordered. The court reversed, holding that Allen could testify that he signed a blank purchase order, and
• Dart Indus. Co., Inc. v. Westwood Chem. Co., Inc.
  649 F.2d 646· 9th Cir.· 1980-04-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in quashing a subpoena duces tecum and denying discovery because the parties' general release agreement unambiguously barred Westwood from seeking discovery against Dart.
• Golden Gate Acceptance Corp. v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  597 F.2d 676· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-23 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a manufacturer's termination of a franchise agreement was proper when the dealer breached material terms by attempting to relocate operations and leasing the premises to a competitor, and that antitrust claims failed for lack of evidence of anticompetitive eff
• DAY v. Avery
  548 F.2d 1018· D.C. Cir.· 1976-11-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that removal of the case was proper and affirmed summary judgment for the defendants on both breach of contract and misrepresentation claims.
• Kademenos v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y OF the United States
  513 F.2d 1073· 3d Cir.· 1975-04-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the plaintiff's breach of contract constituted an illegal bargain, rendering it unenforceable.
• Tomlin v. The Ceres Corp.
  507 F.2d 642· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-29 ·cited 18×
  An extension of time agreement between a creditor and a third party does not discharge a guarantor if the principal debtor is not a party to the agreement. Parol evidence is admissible to clarify ambiguous signatures on contracts.
• Vance D. Bishop and Joseph F. Putnam v. James A. Knowles, Inc.
  292 So. 2d 415· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-03-29 ·cited 18×
  A subcontractor (Nunamaker) sued its contractor (Knowles) for payment and sought to impose a mechanics' lien on the owners' (Trustees') land. The court held that Nunamaker's failure to timely serve notice of intent to claim a lien on the owners precluded the lien, even though one
• Commc'ns Workers OF Am. v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co.
  415 F.2d 35· 5th Cir.· 1969-07-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the dispute over an employee's involuntary retirement, which the Union claimed violated seniority rights under the collective bargaining agreement, was arbitrable. The court reversed the lower court's injunction against arbitration.
• AETNA Ins. Co. v. Newton
  398 F.2d 729· 3d Cir.· 1968-07-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the district court's order was not a final decision, as it failed to resolve all claims and parties and lacked the necessary certification under Rule 54(b).
• 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
• COE v. Diener
  159 So. 2d 269· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-01-03 ·cited 18×
  Constance Coe appealed an order denying her motion to dismiss a suit by Christine Diener for specific performance of an alleged oral settlement agreement. The Florida appellate court held that oral settlement agreements are enforceable in equity despite the parol evidence rule, a
• United States v. Koeller
  310 F.2d 409· 7th Cir.· 1962-12-05 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict that the defendant knowingly transported a stolen vehicle in interstate commerce, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings.
• Lewis v. Mears
  297 F.2d 101· 3d Cir.· 1961-10-11 ·cited 18×
• Armour & Co. v. Celic
  294 F.2d 432· 2d Cir.· 1961-09-06 ·cited 18×
  A contract's validity is not contingent on delivery of copies to parties absent a contractual requirement, and parties' conduct did not demonstrate mutual intent to abandon a consignment contract.
• United States v. Farmers Mut. Ins. Ass'n of Kiron
  288 F.2d 560· 8th Cir.· 1961-04-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint, as material factual issues existed regarding the interpretation of the insurance policy's forfeiture provisions and whether the insurer waived its right to declare a forfeiture.
• REA Constr. Co. & Ætna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. B. B. McCORMICK & Sons, Inc.
  255 F.2d 257· 5th Cir.· 1958-05-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the contract was ambiguous regarding backfill responsibility for trenches under paved areas, allowing parol evidence to establish the subcontractor was not responsible for filling the void left by removed pavement.
• Commodity Credit Corp. v. Rosenberg Bros. & Co., Inc.
  243 F.2d 504· 9th Cir.· 1957-03-07 ·cited 18×
  A bidder cannot recover damages based on increased costs due to the Commodity Credit Corporation's adjusted purchases, as bidders are charged with knowledge of the Corporation's statutory duty to adjust operations.
• Shafer v. Reo Motors, Inc.
  205 F.2d 685· 3d Cir.· 1953-07-14 ·cited 18×
  A contract clause expressly disclaiming all other obligations and liabilities beyond a limited warranty bars a claim for negligence.
• Loughridge's Estate v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  183 F.2d 294· 10th Cir.· 1950-05-11 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the value of the trusts created by the decedent was includable in his gross estate for estate tax purposes, and that the executrix failed to prove entitlement to a deduction for previously taxed property from the Harmon estate.
• Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Penn Athletic Club BLDG.
  176 F.2d 939· 3d Cir.· 1949-09-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Tax Court did not err in finding that Girard Trust Company held the property as a mortgagee in possession, rather than as an owner in fee, for tax purposes.
• Cooper v. Brown
  126 F.2d 874· 3d Cir.· 1942-03-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove a written waiver of mortgage interest and that the lower court's finding on the amount of income received by the defendant was not clearly erroneous.
• Effie M. Hulet v. Denison
  146 Fla. 478· Fla.· 1941-03-25 ·cited 18×
  A satisfaction of mortgage executed by an assignee who took the mortgage after maturity and without proper delivery of the notes and mortgage is invalid.
• Pierson v. Bill
  138 Fla. 104· Fla.· 1939-04-25 ·cited 18×
  Bill acquired property through a trustee (Union Trust Company) in 1934 without knowledge of an unrecorded 1925 mortgage held by Pierson. The court held that Bill is an innocent purchaser for value without notice, protected by the recording statute, and that the unrecorded mortgag
• Burton v. Oliver Farm Equip. Sales Co.
  121 Fla. 148· Fla.· 1935-10-04 ·cited 18×
  R. P. Burton appeals a deficiency decree in a chattel mortgage foreclosure case brought by Oliver Farm Equipment Sales Co., a Maryland corporation. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the decree, rejecting arguments that the foreign corporation lacked standing, violated trade name
• Fox v. Kimball
  92 Fla. 401· Fla.· 1926-07-27 ·cited 18×
  H.W. Fox sued Annie L. Kimball seeking to establish a resulting trust in real property he purchased but took title in her name, claiming this was done for convenience only. The Supreme Court of Florida affirmed the lower court's decree finding no resulting trust existed, holding
• Hancock v. State
  90 Fla. 178· Fla.· 1925-07-23 ·cited 18×
  Frances Hancock was convicted of assault with intent to commit manslaughter after shooting Dr. Wildman during a dispute over a drug store purchase. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting challenges to the admissibility of evidence, jury instructions, and the