Parol Evidence Rule

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

• Univ. Computing Co. v. Lykes-Youngstown Corp.
  504 F.2d 518· 5th Cir.· 1974-11-15 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the jury's findings of LYC's breach of the joint venture agreement and the defendants' misappropriation of the AIMES III trade secret were supported by sufficient evidence, but the award of attorneys' fees required a new trial.
• Hotels OF KEY Largo, Inc. v. RHI Hotels, Inc.
  694 So. 2d 74· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-04-16 ·cited 69×
  Hotels of Key Largo and Casa Magna Investments sued to rescind licensing agreements with RHI Hotels, claiming fraudulent inducement regarding promises about reservation systems and room referrals. The court affirmed dismissal, holding that fraud claims based on misrepresentations
• Strama v. Union Fid. Life Ins. Co.
  793 So. 2d 1129· Fla. 1st DCA· 2001-09-11 ·cited 68×
  A credit disability insurance policyholder challenged his insurer's denial of benefits after a work-related injury. The trial court applied workers' compensation law to conclude the insured could not meet the policy's total disability definition because he was capable of part-tim
• Cornwell Quality Tools Co. v. C. T. S. Co., Inc.
  446 F.2d 825· 9th Cir.· 1971-06-24 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the district court erred in directing verdicts on the contract and most antitrust claims, as sufficient evidence existed to present these issues to a jury, but affirmed the directed verdict on one antitrust claim and the taxation of costs.
• Price v. The S. Home Ins. Co. of the Carolinas
  100 Fla. 338· Fla.· 1930-07-28 ·cited 67×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a directed verdict for an insurance company, holding that when an insurer uses varying descriptions of an insured building in its own policy language, ambiguities are interpreted against the insurer and in favor of the insured. Here, the company
• Bacon v. Louen N. Green
  36 Fla. 325· Fla.· 1895-06-01 ·cited 66×
  In this contract dispute, Mark R. Bacon signed an agreement with Louen N. Green to create abstract books of Jefferson County, Alabama records, but failed to complete the work. Green rescinded the contract and sued for recovery of money paid. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed tha
• Iglehart v. Phillips
  383 So. 2d 610· Fla.· 1980-03-13 ·cited 64×
  The Florida Supreme Court answered certified questions from the Fifth Circuit regarding whether a repurchase option in a deed violates the rule against perpetuities or restraints on alienation, and whether the deed should be rescinded. The court held that an unlimited-duration fi
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Vanater
  297 So. 2d 293· Fla.· 1974-05-29 ·cited 64×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that in reformation of contract actions, the proper burden of proof is clear and convincing evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt. The Court reversed prior precedent that conflated these standards and clarified that reformation, as an equitable re
• Schwartz v. Zaconick
  68 So. 2d 173· Fla.· 1953-06-19 ·cited 62×
  Schwartz sought to foreclose a mortgage on a note executed by the Zaconicks to settle a prior jewelry claim. The Zaconicks defended by asserting a contemporaneous oral agreement that interest would not be due unless the property was sold to third parties. The Florida Supreme Cour
• Miller v. Kase
  789 So. 2d 1095· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-06-20 ·cited 61×
  The trial court applied the doctrine of the last antecedent to interpret a contract provision regarding an escrow account, concluding that a single lump-sum deposit was not required. The Fourth District reversed, holding that the contract language was ambiguous and that the trial
• Horne v. The J. C. Turner Cypress Lumber Co.
  55 Fla. 690· Fla.· 1908-01-01 ·cited 61×
  Knight and others sought to reform a deed poll to expand their turpentine rights from a four-year limited reservation to an absolute exception allowing them to begin cutting boxes whenever convenient and enjoy the privilege for a full four-year period after cutting began. The Flo
• Barakat v. Broward Cnty. Hous. Auth.
  771 So. 2d 1193· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-10-18 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying severance pay because the contract's terms were clear and unambiguous, and the employer failed to plead unconscionability as a defense.
• Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Murray
  853 F.2d 1251· 5th Cir.· 1988-09-06 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the D'Oench, Duhme doctrine and federal common law preclude makers of promissory notes from asserting defenses, including fraudulent alteration, against the FSLIC when it acquires the notes in a purchase and assumption transaction.
• Innkeepers Int'l, Inc. v. McCOY Motels, Ltd.
  324 So. 2d 676· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-12-19 ·cited 60×
  Innkeepers International sued McCoy Motels for breach of an employment contract to manage a newly constructed motel. The trial court found Innkeepers failed to prove its case, but the appellate court reversed, holding that despite a blank commencement date in the contract, the ag
• ST. Louis Typographical Union NO. 8, AFL-CIO v. Herald Co.
  402 F.2d 553· 8th Cir.· 1968-11-07 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the Missouri Supreme Court's judgment barred the claim for severance pay under res judicata, and that the trial court's finding of no binding oral agreement for pension benefits was not clearly erroneous.
• Petition of Canal Barge Co., Inc. v. Griffith
  480 F.2d 11· 5th Cir.· 1973-03-30 ·cited 59×
  The court held that the pilot, despite not having actual knowledge of a specific high-water current hazard, was contributorily negligent as a matter of law for failing to inform himself of conditions an experienced pilot would know, thus reducing damages.
• J. C. Penney Co., Inc. v. Koff
  345 So. 2d 732· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-03-18 ·cited 58×
  J.C. Penney appeals a trial court judgment rescinding a land sale agreement and denying its specific performance claim. The buyer sought rescission due to a zoning change that reduced the property's development density before closing, but the appellate court reversed, holding the
• United States v. Bursten
  453 F.2d 605· 5th Cir.· 1971-12-28 ·cited 58×
• Walker v. Landress
  111 Fla. 356· Fla.· 1933-07-12 ·cited 58×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's order overruling a demurrer in a suit seeking to enforce a resulting trust over real property. W.O. Walker held legal title to land purchased by his sisters T.E. Walker and Harriett Walker with their own funds, allegedly in tru
• Rubie C. Connor v. Connor
  59 Fla. 467· Fla.· 1910-01-01 ·cited 58×
  A wife sought to redeem land conveyed to a creditor as security for her husband's debt, claiming the transaction was a mortgage despite language stating it was an absolute conveyance. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the dismissal, holding that a deed absolute on its face may b
• Ernst Ludwig Kipp v. Sigrun Kipp
  844 So. 2d 691· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-04-23 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the phrase 'up to' in the marital settlement agreement established a maximum limit, not a fixed obligation, for the husband's payment.
• Gould v. Nat'l Bank OF Fla.
  421 So. 2d 798· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-11-16 ·cited 57×
  Appellants Gould and Zwickel appealed a trial court's order granting a new trial and conditionally remitting a $110,000 jury verdict in their favor. The court reversed the new trial on liability issues but affirmed it on damages, holding that the verdicts were not inconsistent an
• Liza Danielle, Inc. v. Jamko, Inc.
  408 So. 2d 735· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-01-12 ·cited 57×
  Jamko, Inc. sought an injunction against Moriber and Liza Danielle, Inc. for violating an exclusivity clause in Jamko's warehouse lease by leasing space to a competing shoe store. The court granted the injunction, but the appellate court reversed, holding that Jamko had an adequa
• Fecteau v. Se. Bank, N.A.
  585 So. 2d 1005· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-08-21 ·cited 56×
  This appeal concerns whether a provision in a 1968 separation agreement granting a former wife exclusive possession of a house was a support obligation (terminating upon the former husband's death) or a property settlement (surviving his death). The court reversed summary judgmen
• LEE v. Flintkote Co.
  593 F.2d 1275· D.C. Cir.· 1979-01-11 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the franchise agreements did not grant franchisees exclusive rights to sell products within their territories, and the language was not ambiguous.
• Am. Fid. & Cas. Co., Inc. v. The London & Edinburgh Ins. Co.
  354 F.2d 214· 4th Cir.· 1965-12-02 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the ambiguity of the term 'remittances due hereunder' in the reinsurance treaty creates a genuine issue of material fact, making summary judgment improper.
• Chamberlain v. Lesley
  39 Fla. 452· Fla.· 1897-06-01 ·cited 56×
  Chamberlain sued Lesley for money paid on the defendant's behalf in an assumpsit action. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the trial court's judgment, holding that parol evidence was properly admitted to establish the underlying agreement and that assumpsit lies when a party pay
• W. B. D., Inc. v. Howard Johnson Co.
  382 So. 2d 1323· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-04-25 ·cited 55×
  This case addresses the jurisdictional issue of whether a prematurely filed notice of appeal matures when a final judgment is later entered, and the substantive issue of whether the statute of frauds and parol evidence rule preclude a jury from deciding whether an oral modificati
• Landis v. Mears
  329 So. 2d 323· Fla. 2d DCA· 1976-03-19 ·cited 55×
  Landis, a corporate president, signed a lease as both a corporate officer and individual, creating ambiguity about his personal liability. The trial court admitted parol evidence to determine the parties' intent and found Landis personally bound despite his contention he signed o
• Appalachian Power Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n
  529 F.2d 342· D.C. Cir.· 1976-01-08 ·cited 55×
  The court affirmed the orders, holding that public utilities cannot unilaterally increase rates contrary to fixed-rate contracts, and federal law does not require deference to state law that would impair the stability of supply arrangements.
• Starsky v. Williams
  512 F.2d 109· 9th Cir.· 1975-02-26 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the trial court properly found the professor's termination was based on constitutionally protected speech, but remanded for a determination on whether a subsequent sabbatical agreement constituted a binding settlement barring the action.
• Ancom, Inc. v. E. R. Squibb & Sons, Inc.
  658 F.2d 650· 8th Cir.· 1981-09-15 ·cited 54×
  An oral contract for services not performable within one year is unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds if a key term, such as exclusivity, is omitted from the written memorandum.
• Local Union NO. 787, Int'l Union OF Elec., Radio & Mach. Workers, AFL-CIO v. Collins Radio Co.
  317 F.2d 214· 5th Cir.· 1963-05-08 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the contract's exclusionary clauses prevented arbitration of the dispute concerning employees permanently replaced before the contract's effective date.
• Agristor Leasing v. Farrow
  826 F.2d 732· 8th Cir.· 1987-08-07 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the Farrows presented sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding Nicol's implied or apparent authority to act as AgriStor's agent, precluding summary judgment.
• DeVALK Lincoln Mercury, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.
  811 F.2d 326· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-16 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the release clause in paragraph 23 of the sales agreement was unambiguous and enforceable, and that the mediation clause required a condition precedent to suit that was not met.
• Linear Corp. & S of L Elecs., Inc. v. Standard Hardware Co.
  423 So. 2d 966· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-12-06 ·cited 53×
  Linear Corporation and S of L Electronics appealed a judgment requiring them to repurchase electronic security devices from Standard Hardware under a written purchase order that expressly prohibited returns and required written modifications. The court affirmed, finding that whil
• Spound v. Mohasco Indus., Inc.
  534 F.2d 404· 1st Cir.· 1976-04-16 ·cited 53×
  The court affirmed the lower court's judgment, finding one patent valid and infringed, another invalid, and denying penalty relief due to an untimely appeal.
• Hervey S. Ross v. Fla. SUN Life Ins. Co.
  124 So. 2d 892· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-12-02 ·cited 53×
  A former employee of Florida Sun Life Insurance Company sued for breach of an alleged oral stock option agreement. The trial court found the written instrument to be merely a receipt rather than a binding contract, and admitted parol evidence of alleged oral conditions precedent.
• Colucci v. EAR Rare Auto. Grp., Inc.
  918 So. 2d 431· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-01-25 ·cited 52×
  Richard Colucci appeals a preliminary injunction prohibiting him from competing nationwide for five years. The appellate court reversed, holding that Kar Kare Automotive Group failed to establish a legitimate business interest sufficient to support enforcement of the non-compete
• Arnott v. The Am. OIL Co.
  609 F.2d 873· 8th Cir.· 1979-10-24 ·cited 52×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict on the antitrust claim and that the district court erred in instructing the jury that a fiduciary relationship existed as a matter of law.
• Carr v. Yokohama Specie Bank
  200 F.2d 251· 9th Cir.· 1952-11-14 ·cited 52×
  A resulting trust does not arise when consideration is uncertain and allocated by conjecture, especially between entities with an extraordinary relationship.
• Swisher v. Conrad
  76 Fla. 644· Fla.· 1919-01-11 ·cited 52×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of a breach of contract action for the sale of land, holding that a check with endorsements regarding payment for a Conrad property did not constitute a sufficient written memorandum under the statute of frauds becaus
• Blanton v. Mobil OIL Corp.
  721 F.2d 1207· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-13 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the antitrust judgment was affirmed, but the contract/fraud judgment was reversed and remanded due to improper mitigation of damages calculation, and the FIPA claim was reversed and remanded.
• Anderson v. Trade Winds Enters. Corp.
  241 So. 2d 174· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-11-25 ·cited 51×
  Lloyd Anderson sued Trade Winds Enterprises Corp. and individual guarantors on a promissory note. The trial court found liability against Trade Winds but not against the individual guarantors. The appellate court reversed, holding that the guaranty was absolute, not conditional,
• Wise v. Ignatius C. Quina and Bertha N. Quina
  174 So. 2d 590· Fla. 1st DCA· 1965-04-20 ·cited 51×
  Two companion cases concerning recreational easement rights in a residential subdivision. Purchasers sought to enforce representations made by the subdivider that a beachfront area would be perpetually reserved for lot owners' recreational use, and appealed from a decree denying
• Evans v. Borkowski
  139 So. 2d 472· Fla. 1st DCA· 1962-03-22 ·cited 51×
  In this Florida real estate dispute, buyers sued to recover an alleged overpayment ($1,386.90 for deferred interest) paid under protest when the seller demanded additional funds as a condition to releasing a mortgage. The appellate court held that the November 1957 mortgage trans
• Meek v. Briggs
  80 Fla. 487· Fla.· 1920-07-29 ·cited 51×
  Meek sought specific performance of an alleged real estate sales contract based on a listing, telegram, and letter from the sellers to their agent. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed dismissal, holding that the unsigned listing could not be incorporated into the written memorandu
• Stephens v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co.
  749 F.3d 1318· 11th Cir.· 2014-04-24 ·cited 50×
  A construction worker employed by a subcontractor was killed in a fall while working on a modular home installation project. The general contractor, Anchorage Homes, held a commercial general liability insurance policy with Mid-Continent Casualty Company that excluded coverage fo
• Eclipse Med., Inc. v. Am. Hydro-Surgical Instruments, Inc.
  262 F. Supp. 2d 1334· S.D. Fla.· 1999-01-20 ·cited 50×
  The court held that claims for fraudulent inducement based on oral promises contradicting a written contract are barred by the parol evidence rule, Statute of Frauds, and the economic loss doctrine.
• Sunstream JET Express, Inc. v. Int'l AIR Serv. Co., Ltd.
  734 F.2d 1258· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-22 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting extrinsic and parol evidence to interpret the aircraft lease agreement, as the contract's terms were ambiguous regarding engine replacement.