Parol Evidence Rule

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

• Gatz v. Sw. Bank OF Omaha
  836 F.2d 1089· 8th Cir.· 1988-03-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a district court has discretion to allow a non-party to enforce a settlement agreement and that the settlement agreement's scope was limited to investments listed in Exhibit A, precluding claims on other investments.
• Local 3-7 v. DAW Forest Prods. Co.
  833 F.2d 789· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-30 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's decision, finding that the district court correctly interpreted the agreement and made no clearly erroneous factual findings.
• Hilton Int'l Co. v. Union de Trabajadores DE LA Industria Gastronomica de Puerto RICO
  833 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1987-11-20 ·cited 6×
  A dismissal without prejudice, when the statute of limitations has run, is effectively a dismissal with prejudice, barring a new action.
• KL Grp. v. Case
  829 F.2d 909· 9th Cir.· 1987-10-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding the scope of legal representation, precluding summary judgment, but affirmed the protective order barring use of an inadvertently produced privileged letter.
• Nat'l Distillers & Chem. Corp. & Bridgeport Brass Corp. v. First Nat'l Bank OF Highland Park under Tr. No. 3433
  804 F.2d 978· 7th Cir.· 1986-10-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that summary judgment for the tenant was inappropriate because the landlord may have reasonably withheld consent due to insufficient financial information about the assignee, and the lease's meaning regarding assignment after a corporate spinoff is ambiguous.
• Wilson v. First Fla. Bank
  498 So. 2d 1289· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-10-31 ·cited 6×
  This appeal addresses whether a will containing detailed provisions for a scholarship fund at the University of Georgia but lacking express language of conveyance or a residuary clause constitutes a valid testamentary disposition or results in partial intestacy. The court held th
• Massie v. Inexco OIL Co.
  798 F.2d 777· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that paragraph XXXIII of the mineral lease, when read in its entirety, does not operate as an absolute depth termination clause and does not negate the lessee's right to hold the lease by continuous operations.
• Lear v. The Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y OF the United States
  798 F.2d 1128· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the agent, David, only had express authority to collect the first premium check, and thus the principal, Equitable, was not liable for subsequent misrepresentations. The court also found that the statute of limitations issue should have been submitted to the j
• Sonat Exploration Co. v. Mann
  785 F.2d 1232· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-14 ·cited 6×
  An Authorization for Expenditure (AFE), standing alone, does not create a binding obligation to pay drilling costs for an owner who has not signed or ratified the operating agreement.
• Schuck v. Gilmore Steel Corp.
  784 F.2d 947· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act did not deprive the district court of jurisdiction to hear the case, but affirmed the dismissal for failure to state a claim because ERISA's exception for reversion of excess pension funds applied.
• In re The Est. OF Walter J. Jones v. Jones
  472 So. 2d 1299· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-07-12 ·cited 6×
  This case addresses whether a specific bequest in a will was adeemed when the exact property described (income from a home) was sold before the testator's death, but the proceeds remained traceable in the estate. The court held that Florida law requires consideration of the testa
• Peterson v. Lexington Ins. Co.
  753 F.2d 1016· 11th Cir.· 1985-02-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting parol evidence to contradict the unambiguous terms of a bill of sale, as the sale voided the insurance policy.
• Advance Process Supply Co. v. Litton Indus. Credit Corp.
  745 F.2d 1076· 7th Cir.· 1984-09-27 ·cited 6×
  A seller/guarantor who warrants proper filing remains liable for a creditor's negligent filing, as the warranty overrides any claim of impaired collateral.
• Shatto v. Evans Prods. Co.
  728 F.2d 1224· 9th Cir.· 1984-03-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding the plan's termination date, the substitution of pension plans, and the satisfaction of contingent liabilities, precluding summary judgment.
• Union Pac. Land Res. Corp. v. Moench Inv. Co., Ltd.
  696 F.2d 88· 10th Cir.· 1982-12-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Union Pacific Act did not preclude the railroad from reserving mineral interests when selling surface estates, and the phrase 'coal and other minerals' unambiguously includes oil and gas under Wyoming law.
• United States for the Use & Benefit of Fed. Corp. v. Commercial Mech. Contractors, Inc.
  707 F.2d 1124· 10th Cir.· 1982-09-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting oral evidence of a 'time is of the essence' provision, submitting the issue of equitable estoppel to the jury, or instructing the jury on recoverable damages.
• Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Walter S. Blume & the Electrodyne Co., Inc.
  684 F.2d 1166· 6th Cir.· 1982-07-07 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgments, finding that Blume infringed the 275 patent, breached the non-compete agreement, and that the 675 patent was invalid for obviousness.
• Douglas v. United States Tobacco Co.
  670 F.2d 791· 8th Cir.· 1982-02-10 ·cited 6×
  A general release discharging "all other persons, firms, corporations..." satisfies the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act's requirement that a release "so provides" to discharge other tortfeasors, and parol evidence is inadmissible to vary an unambiguous release.
• Gen. Matters, Inc. v. Penny Prods., Inc.
  651 F.2d 1017· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in reducing the setoff amount by 50% based on a separate agreement York had with a third party, as damages should reflect the full lost profit. The court affirmed the remainder of the judgment.
• Koedding v. Slaughter
  634 F.2d 1095· 8th Cir.· 1980-11-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the contract was enforceable, the buyer breached it, and the liquidated damages clause was void, affirming the judgment for the seller.
• Woods-Tucker Leasing Corp. OF Ga. v. Hutcheson-Ingram Dev. Co.
  626 F.2d 401· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) § 1.105(a) governs choice of law in multi-state transactions, allowing parties to choose the governing law if the chosen jurisdiction has a reasonable relation to the transaction, and that Mississippi had sufficient contacts t
• In re Jules B. LeBLANC, III v. Chase Manhattan Mortg. & Realty Tr. & La. Nat'l Bank
  622 F.2d 872· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Louisiana corporate usury exception applies to loans made to dummy corporations for business purposes, and that an interest rate of four points above prime is sufficiently fixed in writing. The court also affirmed the bankruptcy court's classification of i
• Lancaster Oil Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co.
  486 F. Supp. 399· N.D. Fla.· 1980-01-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the insured affirmatively rejected higher uninsured motorists coverage by signing a supplemental application indicating a choice for the minimum limit.
• Cent. Jersey Dodge Truck Ctr., Inc. v. Sightseer Corp. & PRF Indus., Inc.
  608 F.2d 1106· 6th Cir.· 1979-10-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the written dealer agreement did not supersede the prior oral repurchase agreement, as the contract was ambiguous and the parties' intent, evidenced by surrounding circumstances and subsequent conduct, indicated the oral agreement remained valid.
• Euphemia M. Rowland v. Whitehead
  375 So. 2d 607· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-10-03 ·cited 6×
  In this appeal of an appeal, the Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed its own prior decision and remanded for a new trial, holding that a plaintiff whose judgment was reversed for lack of evidence due to exclusion of parol evidence testimony may pursue a reformation c
• Osborne v. The Coleman Co., Inc.
  592 F.2d 1239· 5th Cir.· 1979-03-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appeal should be remanded to the district court to determine if a release executed by the plaintiffs mooted their appeal against the defendant Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc.
• In re Est. OF Luby L. Roberts, Jr. v. Bolton
  367 So. 2d 269· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-02-13 ·cited 6×
  Luby Lee Roberts, Sr. appealed an order admitting his deceased son's Will to probate and denying his petition for administration without a will. The trial court found the Will's common disaster clause sufficiently ambiguous to warrant an evidentiary hearing, and based on uncontra
• Flower City Painting Contractors, Inc. v. Gumina Constr. Co.
  591 F.2d 162· 2d Cir.· 1979-01-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a unilateral mistake by the contractor in drawing the contract, which was based on a subcontractor's proposal, does not permit rescission or modification of the contract.
• In re Cal. Pump & Mfg. Co., Inc. v. England
  588 F.2d 717· 9th Cir.· 1978-11-20 ·cited 6×
  Parol evidence cannot be admitted to reform a security agreement to include collateral not described in the writing, as it undermines the UCC's purpose of commercial certainty and the statute of frauds requirements.
• First Nat'l Bank OF Minneapolis v. Fid. Nat'l Title Ins. Co.
  572 F.2d 155· 8th Cir.· 1978-03-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that disputed issues of fact exist regarding whether First National Bank agreed to a position secondary to prior encumbrances, precluding summary judgment.
• Marien E. Durst and G. Chester Durst v. The United States
  559 F.2d 910· 3d Cir.· 1977-07-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the settlor did not retain the power to appoint himself trustee, and therefore the trust's value was not includable in his gross estate for tax purposes.
• Mount v. Book-Of-The-Month Club, Inc.
  555 F.2d 1108· 2d Cir.· 1977-05-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the statute of limitations barred the first count and most of the second count, but a triable issue of fact existed regarding whether a release signed by the plaintiff barred the remaining claim.
• Graves v. Sneed
  541 F.2d 159· 6th Cir.· 1976-09-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of federal question jurisdiction, as the dispute primarily concerned state property and contract law.
• Werner v. Harper
  328 So. 2d 511· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-03-05 ·cited 6×
  A Florida appellate court reversed a judgment in favor of Harper, who assigned rights from the Levin Group in a contract dispute involving stock in Werner Industries. The court found insufficient evidence that defendants breached the contract and that the Levin Group failed to te
• Greenwald v. Blume
  312 So. 2d 783· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-05-13 ·cited 6×
  An executor of a deceased wife's estate appealed the trial court's dismissal of claims against the husband in a dissolution of marriage proceeding. The appellate court affirmed, holding that a property settlement agreement was conditioned on a final judgment of dissolution, which
• Guida v. The Exch. Nat'l Bank OF Tampa
  308 So. 2d 148· Fla. 2d DCA· 1975-02-05 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision invalidating the patent for obviousness.
• 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.
• First Nat'l Bank IN Dallas v. Rozelle
  493 F.2d 1196· 10th Cir.· 1974-01-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the mortgage's future advance and omnibus provisions covered subsequent loans for unrelated operations, and that a counterclaim for wrongful refusal to release the mortgage failed because the bank acted in good faith and was entitled to foreclose on the additi
• Pickens-Kane Moving & Storage Co., Inc. v. Aero Mayflower Transit Co., Inc.
  468 F.2d 490· 7th Cir.· 1972-10-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the jury instructions, when considered as a whole, fairly presented the applicable Illinois law regarding the parol evidence rule and its exceptions.
• Leslie S. RAY Ins. Agency, Inc. v. United States
  463 F.2d 210· 1st Cir.· 1972-07-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a taxpayer cannot unilaterally allocate purchase price to non-compete agreements without evidence of a prior agreement between the parties on such allocation.
• United States v. Erickson Paving Co. & Associated Eng'rs & Contractors, Inc.
  465 F.2d 396· 9th Cir.· 1972-06-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the subcontract was ambiguous regarding compensation for excavation outside the design prism, and extrinsic evidence supported the interpretation that the subcontractor was only entitled to payment for rock work performed within the design prism.
• Thomas v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.
  457 F.2d 1053· 3d Cir.· 1972-03-15 ·cited 6×
• The Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am. v. William D. (Bill) Clark and Margaret Clark
  456 F.2d 932· 5th Cir.· 1972-02-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the jury's finding of intentional waiver was supported by evidence and that promissory estoppel and ratification applied, overriding the trial court's reliance on the voluntary payment statute.
• Rehart v. Commander Lynn R. Clark
  448 F.2d 170· 9th Cir.· 1971-09-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a BUPERS Instruction, referenced in an enlistment extension agreement, is part of the governing law and cannot be disregarded in interpreting the agreement, even under the parol evidence rule.
• In re Charley Paul McCLAIN v. Utica Square Nat'l Bank OF Tulsa
  447 F.2d 241· 10th Cir.· 1971-08-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that parol evidence is admissible to determine the primary use of collateral and that a warranty of use in a security agreement is not conclusive for filing purposes.
• Mark v. McDONNELL & Co., Inc.
  447 F.2d 847· 7th Cir.· 1971-08-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the sale of unregistered securities in violation of the Illinois Securities Law was voidable, and the loan of stock constituted part of the consideration paid, entitling the purchaser to rescission.
• Babdo Sales, Inc. v. Miller-Wohl Co., Inc.
  440 F.2d 962· 2d Cir.· 1971-04-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the parties' conduct and prior dealings, along with written memoranda, were sufficient to take the new leasing agreements, including the Springfield lease, out of the statute of frauds, and that there was no disputed question of fact regarding contractual inte
• 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.
• Mesch v. United States
  407 F.2d 1286· 10th Cir.· 1969-03-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the parol evidence rule does not apply to criminal prosecutions for fraud, and that the trial court's instructions and evidentiary rulings were proper.
• J. S. Michael Co. v. Rayonier
  212 So. 2d 824· Fla. 1st DCA· 1968-07-23 ·cited 6×
  Parol evidence is admissible to explain the meaning of terms in a written lease as intended by the parties, and a party with peculiar knowledge of facts directly affecting the parties' intent cannot intentionally withhold such knowledge to the detriment of the other party. The tr