Parol Evidence Rule

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

• Nigel Gibney and Christine Gibney v. Pillifant
  32 So. 3d 784· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-04-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appraisal contingency was not ambiguous and the trial court erred in admitting extrinsic evidence to interpret it differently from its plain language.
• Zanakis v. Zanakis
  629 So. 2d 181· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-11-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that even if mislabeled as a resulting trust, the facts supported the imposition of a constructive trust to prevent unjust enrichment.
• A-1 Racing Specialties, Inc. v. K & S Imports OF Broward Cnty., Inc.
  576 So. 2d 421· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-03-20 ·cited 12×
  A-1 Racing sued K & S Imports and its president Mark Klein for breach of a payment check that was stopped after A-1 performed under their contract. The trial court dismissed Klein personally, but the appellate court reversed, holding that a corporate officer who signs a check wit
• Burger King Corp. v. The Horn & Hardart Co.
  893 F.2d 525· 2d Cir.· 1990-01-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Settlement Agreement's language regarding franchise terms was ambiguous, and conflicting extrinsic evidence created triable issues of fact, making summary judgment inappropriate.
• Harold B. Calder and Dorothy v. Calder
  892 F.2d 629· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly determined that the bankruptcy court improperly relied on parol evidence to find that a prior guaranty was released by later, integrated, and unambiguous loan documents.
• Lovejoy Elecs., Inc. v. O'Berto
  873 F.2d 1001· 7th Cir.· 1989-04-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the parol evidence rule does not bar evidence of promissory fraud and that the Illinois dead man's statute, as applied through Federal Rule of Evidence 601, did not bar O'Berto's testimony due to ambiguity in his deposition regarding witness presence.
• Kutner Buick, Inc. v. Am. Motors Corp. & Am. Motor Sales Corp.
  868 F.2d 614· 3d Cir.· 1989-02-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the breach of contract claim based on grounds not raised in the directed verdict motion, and that the exclusion of expert testimony on damages was based on an incorrect understanding of fixed versus variable costs. The fraud
• Joseph U. Moore, Inc. v. Howard
  534 So. 2d 935· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-12-16 ·cited 12×
  Joseph U. Moore, Inc. appeals the denial of a temporary injunction against former employee John A. Howard for alleged breach of a non-solicitation covenant. The court reversed in part and remanded, holding that the covenant applies to customers Howard acquired during his employme
• Kroblin Refrigerated Xpress, Inc. v. Wernert J. Pitterich
  805 F.2d 96· 3d Cir.· 1986-11-06 ·cited 12×
  The Third Circuit affirmed the district court's rulings on the guarantee clause, frustration of purpose, specific performance, shareholder standing, and the law firm's fiduciary duty. However, it reversed the district court's determination that Pitterich's $100,000 claim under th
• The Port OF Portland v. Water Quality Ins. Syndicate
  796 F.2d 1188· 9th Cir.· 1986-08-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Port's dredge was engaged in commerce under the FWPCA, that notice and consent provisions were met, that insurers' conflicting 'other insurance' clauses should be prorated, that pollution cleanup costs constitute property damage, and that attorney's fees w
• Computer Sys. OF Am., Inc. v. Int'l Bus. Machs. Corp.
  795 F.2d 1086· 1st Cir.· 1986-06-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a jury could find an enforceable contract existed despite a clause stating the lease was dependent upon satisfactory contractual arrangements, and that the statute of frauds did not bar enforcement under Texas law.
• Bank OF Am. Nat'l Tr. & Sav. Ass'n v. Gillaizeau
  766 F.2d 709· 2d Cir.· 1985-07-01 ·cited 12×
• Menendez v. Perishable Distribs., Inc.
  763 F.2d 1374· 11th Cir.· 1985-06-25 ·cited 12×
• Triangle Mining Co., Inc. v. Stauffer Chem. Co.
  753 F.2d 734· 9th Cir.· 1985-01-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the express termination clause in the contract was enforceable as written, and implied covenants of good faith and fair dealing did not apply to limit Stauffer's right to terminate. Recovery under the liquidated damages provision was also limited as interprete
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Safeway Stores
  714 F.2d 567· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-16 ·cited 12×
  Federal courts have jurisdiction to enforce Title VII conciliation agreements, and such agreements can be enforced without an independent finding of discrimination, but union objections to seniority provisions require union participation in the underlying discrimination adjudicat
• Mohr v. Metro E. MFG. Co.
  711 F.2d 69· 7th Cir.· 1983-06-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the parol evidence rule does not bar evidence of an oral agreement modifying a collective bargaining agreement when the written agreement was not intended to be a complete expression of the parties' understanding.
• Atl. Purchasers, Inc. v. Aircraft Sales, Inc.
  705 F.2d 712· 4th Cir.· 1983-04-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district judge erred in denying the plaintiffs' motion to amend their complaint to seek treble damages under the North Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act, as the jury's findings of fraud established a violation of the Act and treble damages are an automat
• Landmark Land Co., Inc. v. Irvine H. Sprague
  701 F.2d 1065· 2d Cir.· 1983-03-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted because a material issue of fact exists regarding the appellant's status as a good faith purchaser, particularly given the limited discovery.
• Chelsea Indus., Inc. v. Accuray Leasing Corp.
  699 F.2d 58· 1st Cir.· 1983-02-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a policy letter, intended by the defendant to be understood by the plaintiff as a firm option to purchase leased equipment, constituted a binding contractual obligation, even if not formally part of the lease agreement.
• Maxwell Owen Monroe v. Clark Appelton
  419 So. 2d 356· Fla. 2d DCA· 1982-09-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the question of whether the $100,000 was a gift or a loan presented a genuine issue of material fact, precluding summary judgment.
• Cold Well Banker & Co. v. Merlin Karlock
  686 F.2d 596· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-17 ·cited 12×
  A real estate brokerage commission agreement is governed by the law of the state with the most significant relationship to the transaction, and an unlicensed broker can recover if that state's law applies and does not violate forum public policy.
• Int'l City Bank & Tr. Co. v. Morgan Walton Props., Inc.
  675 F.2d 666· 5th Cir.· 1982-05-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the notes were payable on demand and the lawsuit was not premature, and that there was no enforceable seven-year financing contract. The court also found no prejudice from counsel's arguments.
• In re Chicago
  654 F.2d 1218· 7th Cir.· 1981-06-16 ·cited 12×
  The Reorganization Court has exclusive jurisdiction over railroad property, and abstention is not warranted when state law questions are not unsettled or when convenience favors the estate.
• In re the Marriage of Laurel J. Ising Marsh v. Marsh
  399 So. 2d 433· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-06-03 ·cited 12×
  In this divorce case, the Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's decision to partition and sell the marital home, holding that the wife retained a special equity in property she owned before marriage and transferred into joint tenancy solely to protect
• Amoco Prod. Co. v. Guild Tr.
  636 F.2d 261· 10th Cir.· 1980-10-27 ·cited 12×
  A reservation of "coal and other minerals" in a deed is unambiguous and includes oil and gas as a matter of Wyoming law, even with references to "mines" or "mining."
• Unatin v. Hudon
  383 So. 2d 1131· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-05-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting specific performance based on a preponderance of the evidence and in admitting parol evidence to establish an unexecuted lease.
• Lauderdale N. Props., Inc. v. Seacrest Homes, Inc.
  382 So. 2d 386· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-04-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Secretary's interpretation of Medicare regulations, which treated a two-step acquisition (stock purchase followed by liquidation) as two independent events to deny a stepped-up basis for asset valuation, was arbitrary and erroneous.
• Sullivan v. Mass. Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  611 F.2d 261· 9th Cir.· 1979-10-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that written employment contracts containing a terminable-at-will clause superseded any prior oral agreement for termination only for cause, and thus summary judgment for the employer was appropriate.
• John Deere Indus. Equip. Co. v. Roberts
  362 So. 2d 65· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-08-09 ·cited 12×
  John Deere and its credit life insurer Sierra General appealed summary judgments against them, claiming the Roberts were not entitled to credit life insurance coverage following C. W. Roberts Jr.'s death. The court reversed, holding that only the actual signer of the contract (Ch
• Phillips v. Iglehart
  558 F.2d 737· 5th Cir.· 1977-09-02 ·cited 12×
  The court certified questions of Florida law to the Florida Supreme Court regarding the validity of a repurchase option in a deed, the consequences of its invalidity, and the admissibility of parol evidence concerning consideration.
• Julius Goldman's Egg City v. The United States
  556 F.2d 1096· Ct. Cl.· 1977-06-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that judicial review of indemnity payments is available, but only to determine if the administrative computation was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or contrary to law. The court also found that triable issues of fact existed regarding the plaintiff'
• Fitch v. Galen Doke
  532 F.2d 115· 8th Cir.· 1976-03-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to submit the interpretation of an ambiguous contract provision to the jury.
• Lucie v. Kleen-Leen, Inc.
  499 F.2d 220· 7th Cir.· 1974-05-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment without analyzing extrinsic evidence, as a genuine issue of fact existed regarding contract interpretation.
• Rowland v. Nat'l States Ins. Co.
  295 So. 2d 335· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-05-21 ·cited 12×
  An insurance company denied coverage for a minor's hospitalization claim based on an unsigned, undated policy document, claiming only a receipt was issued. The appellate court reversed the summary judgment and held that the written document constituted an effective binder of insu
• United States v. 1
  486 F.2d 445· 10th Cir.· 1973-10-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that fraudulent misrepresentations by a government negotiator regarding payment timing can void an offer to sell land, even if the offer contains contradictory terms.
• In re Martin v. Henley
  452 F.2d 295· 9th Cir.· 1971-11-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the referee exceeded his authority by amending a discharge order nunc pro tunc to exclude a debt, but affirmed the determination that the debt was nondischargeable as maintenance and support.
• Harville Rose Serv. v. Kellogg Co.
  448 F.2d 1346· 5th Cir.· 1971-09-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the written purchase order, containing an integration clause, superseded all prior oral agreements, and thus extrinsic evidence of those oral agreements was inadmissible.
• Herbert R. Bennett in Bankr. of Hawkeye Loan Co., Inc. v. First Nat'l Bank OF Humboldt
  443 F.2d 518· 8th Cir.· 1971-06-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in submitting the issue of whether a signature card agreement had been modified to the jury, as there was conflicting evidence regarding the applicable signature requirement.
• Whitmer v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  443 F.2d 170· 3d Cir.· 1971-05-20 ·cited 12×
  Taxpayers do not possess a sufficient economic interest in the coal lease to qualify for the depletion deduction because the County, as lessor, retained the right to terminate the lease on thirty days' notice.
• Beach Keys, Inc. v. Girvin
  213 So. 2d 314· Fla. 1st DCA· 1968-08-08 ·cited 12×
  Parol evidence is admissible to prove a condition precedent to the existence of a written mortgage, showing that the contract never became binding.
• United States v. Waterman S.S. Corp.
  397 F.2d 577· 5th Cir.· 1968-06-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the charter agreement's provision for an 80% payment upon sailing did not expressly alter the maritime law principle that freight is earned only upon delivery of the goods.
• DRY Clime Lamp Corp. & Henry S. Arnold v. Edwards
  389 F.2d 590· 5th Cir.· 1968-01-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while a personal judgment could be entered against Dry Clime, it lacked the power to enter a personal judgment against Consolidated if Consolidated had no interest in the attached funds, and any judgment against Consolidated must be limited to its interest in
• The Telex Corp. v. Balch
  382 F.2d 211· 8th Cir.· 1967-08-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the employment contract was unambiguous and limited the plaintiff's compensation to that explicitly stated within the contract.
• The HERTZ Corp. v. Dixon
  193 So. 2d 176· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-12-29 ·cited 12×
  A co-owner of an automobile who executes a conditional sales contract designating himself as co-buyer and holds record title is vicariously liable for damages caused by the other co-owner's negligent operation of the vehicle.
• Gen. Guar. Ins. Co. v. Parkerson
  369 F.2d 821· 5th Cir.· 1966-12-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claims were barred by the Statute of Frauds and the parol evidence rule, as any oral promises made by the defendant were either unenforceable guaranties or contradicted by a written release.
• The AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. The United States for Use & Benefit of R. J. Studer & Sons
  365 F.2d 997· 8th Cir.· 1966-09-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that state statutes cannot qualify rights granted under the federal Miller Act and affirmed the trial court's determination of the excavation payment rate. However, it reversed the allowance of certain labor cost reimbursements not supported by written authorizatio
• W. Los Angeles Inst. for Cancer Research v. Ward Mayer
  366 F.2d 220· 9th Cir.· 1966-08-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the doctrine of commercial frustration applied, excusing performance due to a supervening event (adverse tax ruling) that frustrated the essential purpose of the contract, and that the equitable defense of unclean hands and the defense of laches were not appli
• Thal v. Roth
  173 So. 2d 174· Fla. 3d DCA· 1965-03-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appellant failed to preserve the parole evidence rule argument and that the jury's finding on holder in due course status was supported by evidence.
• Rosen v. Rosen
  167 So. 2d 70· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-09-08 ·cited 12×
  A Florida appeals court held that life insurance policy proceeds designated to the insured's father were held in trust for the insured's minor children, based on parol evidence of the insured's intent, and reversed the lower court's order directing payment to a guardian instead o
• Kasey v. Molybdenum Corp. OF Am.
  336 F.2d 560· 9th Cir.· 1964-08-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the action for recovery of mining properties was barred by California's five-year statute of limitations because the appellants were neither seised nor possessed of the property within the statutory period, and the deeds conveyed absolute title.