Parol Evidence Rule

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

• Liberty Sav. Ass'n v. SUN Bank OF Jacksonville
  572 F.2d 591· 7th Cir.· 1978-03-27 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the assignment of savings accounts was absolute and not conditional on Liberty's approval, and that Liberty's negligence in providing documentation enabled the wrongful act of a third party.
• Westinghouse Elec. Supply Co. v. Fid. & Deposit Co. OF Md. & Andrichyn & Schnabel, Inc.
  560 F.2d 1109· 3d Cir.· 1977-06-06 ·cited 5×
  The majority affirmed the award of one setoff but reversed another, interpreting a subcontract to incorporate general contract provisions not explicitly referenced.
• City OF Miami Beach v. Smith
  551 F.2d 1370· 5th Cir.· 1977-05-16 ·cited 5×
  The court held that Cameron-Brown was entitled to the condemnation award as the fee owner of the property, and that the appellants' claims of beneficial ownership, corporate opportunity, and judicial estoppel were without merit.
• Mathews v. Fla. Crossbreeds, Inc.
  330 So. 2d 183· Fla. 2d DCA· 1976-04-09 ·cited 5×
  Mathews leased farmland to Crossbreeds under an agreement containing an option to purchase. When Crossbreeds exercised the option, Mathews refused to proceed, prompting Crossbreeds to sue for reformation and specific performance. The court reformed the defective legal description
• Dade City v. Simpson
  290 So. 2d 530· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-02-06 ·cited 5×
  In this inverse condemnation case, the court reversed the trial court's finding that a property owner acquired title to a road that ran through her property. The court held that parol evidence cannot be used to interpret the general term "all roads and streets" in a deed exclusio
• Armour & Co. v. Nard
  463 F.2d 8· 8th Cir.· 1972-06-07 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its rulings regarding commissions, costs, or the exclusion of evidence concerning oral agreements, and that the jury's findings were supported by the record.
• Russom v. Ins. Co. OF N. Am.
  421 F.2d 985· 6th Cir.· 1970-02-13 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a lease agreement requiring the lessee to provide cargo and liability insurance was in force at the time of a fatal accident, obligating the insurer to cover the resulting judgment.
• E. Coast Elecs., Inc. v. Walter E. Heller & Co. OF Fla.
  355 F.2d 923· 5th Cir.· 1966-01-24 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the parole evidence rule barred admission of evidence contradicting the clear terms of the financing agreements regarding clearance charges.
• Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Jefferson Distrib. Co., Inc.
  353 F.2d 956· 5th Cir.· 1965-12-06 ·cited 5×
  The court held that written agreements clearly establishing an order-to-order sales relationship, terminable at will, precluded claims based on alleged oral modifications or implied contracts for distributorship permanence. It also affirmed dismissal of a claim based on alleged i
• Allison v. Rogero
  112 So. 2d 578· Fla. 3d DCA· 1959-06-04 ·cited 5×
  Allison challenged Rogero's title to Dade County land acquired through a deed from the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund under the Murphy Act, arguing that erroneous property descriptions in the tax sales certificates and assessments voided the state's title transfer. The
• Leighton v. Harmon
  111 So. 2d 697· Fla. 2d DCA· 1959-05-01 ·cited 5×
  Leighton appealed the probate court's denial of his petition to probate Helen Baier's will, which named him as sole beneficiary. The court found the will had been cancelled based on handwriting evidence and witness testimony that Baier had revoked it, and the appellate court affi
• Campbell v. Am. Fabrics Co.
  168 F.2d 959· 2d Cir.· 1948-05-26 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the case should be remanded for a trial on whether the arbitrator considered earnings and to determine the identity of the arbitrator and the parties' intent regarding the arbitration.
• Farmers Union Warehouse Co. v. T. L. Wells & Bros.
  65 Fla. 350· Fla.· 1913-04-01 ·cited 5×
  In this lumber sale dispute, the Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment for Farmers Union Warehouse Company against T. L. Wells & Brothers, holding that the trial court improperly admitted vague mortgage language as evidence and erroneously excluded testimony that could have e
• Dozier v. Scruggs
  380 So. 3d 505· Fla. 5th DCA· 2024-02-02 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's denial of a motion to enforce a mediated settlement agreement. The court held that the agreement was enforceable, despite the absence of a specific timeframe for performance, and remanded the case for enforcement.
• THE Brody Irrevocable Grantor Tr. NO. 2 v. Brody
  322 So. 3d 150· Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-05-28 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's finding of accord and satisfaction. The court held that a debtor's payment, even if labeled "in full," does not constitute an accord and satisfaction if there was no pre-existing dispute between the parties regarding the amount owed.
• Clayton v. Poggendorf
  237 So. 3d 1041· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-02-21 ·cited 4×
  Clayton appealed a final judgment enforcing a settlement agreement for a business purchase dispute. The trial court held Clayton in breach for failure to make periodic payments and entered judgment against him, despite Clayton's argument that he did not receive proper notice of l
• Harkless v. Laubhan
  219 So. 3d 900· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-12-21 ·cited 4×
  David Harkless appeals a summary judgment in favor of the Laubhans, claiming he reserved the right to receive rent from a Verizon lease when he sold property containing the leased parcel. The court reverses, holding that Harkless validly reserved his rental rights in the initial
• Optima Tobacco Corp. v. US Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers, Inc.
  2016 WL 1045838· S.D. Fla.· 2016-03-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that because the manufacturing agreement clearly established UETA's ownership of the copyrights, Optima lacked standing to bring a copyright infringement claim, requiring dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
• In re Est. OF Va. E. Murphy. Jacqueline Rocke v. Am. Research Bureau
  184 So. 3d 1221· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-01-20 ·cited 4×
  Virginia E. Murphy, a 107-year-old testator, left multiple wills executed over five years. The probate court invalidated the 1994 will's residuary clause due to undue influence by her attorney Jack Carey and his assistant, but upheld the will's revocation clause, causing the esta
• Ioannides v. Romagosa
  93 So. 3d 431· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-07-11 ·cited 4×
  A party cannot recover for fraudulent inducement based on oral misrepresentations that are adequately addressed or contradicted by a subsequent written contract, especially when the contract contains an integration clause.
• CJM Fin., Inc. v. Castillo Grand, LLC
  40 So. 3d 863· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-07-14 ·cited 4×
  CJM Financing appealed a summary judgment dismissing its breach of contract claim for $50,000, asserting an oral promise to pay the remaining amount despite executing a general release. The court affirmed, holding that the clear language of the release barred the claim and CJM fa
• Lenhart v. Federated Nat'l Ins. Co.
  950 So. 2d 454· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-02-14 ·cited 4×
  This case involves whether an automobile insurance policy covers an unlicensed, underage family member who drove a friend's vehicle with the owner's consent. The court held that the policy covers the son because the insurer failed to explicitly exclude him and ambiguous exclusion
• Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Phineas Corp.
  347 F. Supp. 2d 1231· M.D. Fla.· 2004-09-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that summary judgment for the insurer on breach of contract was appropriate, as the insured's challenges to the final premium calculation were barred by administrative remedy exhaustion requirements and lacked merit. The court also vacated judgments against co-defe
• Amendment to the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar
  875 So. 2d 448· Fla.· 2004-05-20 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court adopted amendments to the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, addressing numerous procedural and substantive changes to disciplinary rules, fee regulations, trust accounts, advertising standards, and specialized practice certifications. The amendments refl
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. W. Gables Open MRI Servs., Inc.
  846 So. 2d 538· Fla. 3d DCA· 2003-03-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plain meaning rule applies to statutory interpretation, precluding the use of parol evidence to alter an unambiguous effective date.
• Bron White v. Ocean BAY Marina, Inc.
  778 So. 2d 412· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-01-31 ·cited 4×
• Ric Abernethy v. Nat'l Union Fire INS. Co.
  717 So. 2d 196· Fla. 5th DCA· 1998-09-18 ·cited 4×
  Abernethy appeals a summary judgment dismissing his medical payments bad faith claim against National Union, arguing the general release he signed with Florida Auto Auction did not encompass his separate bad faith claim. The court vacates and remands, finding a genuine issue of m
• 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
• Porlick v. Compton
  683 So. 2d 545· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-10-02 ·cited 4×
  Porlick and his engineering corporation sued attorney Robert Compton and his law firm for unpaid fees under a consulting agreement. The trial court granted summary judgment for Compton individually, finding the contract bound only the law firm, not Compton personally. The appella
• Amplicon Fin., Inc. v. Sunshine-Jr. Stores
  198 B.R. 823· M.D. Fla.· 1996-06-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Amplicon's reversionary interest was extinguished by the debtor's default and CIT's exercise of its rights under the assignment, and that the assignment was unambiguous, precluding parol evidence.
• Am. Cas. Co. of Reading v. Hess
  654 So. 2d 1011· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-05-12 ·cited 4×
  The denial of summary judgment is affirmed because the indemnity agreement was ambiguous regarding personal liability, creating a fact issue. The dismissal for lack of prosecution is reversed because the discovery activity was not in bad faith and served to move the case forward.
• In re Est. OF Hazel Cooper Corbin. Bill Corbin, Sr. v. Sherman
  645 So. 2d 39· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-10-24 ·cited 4×
  Bill Corbin, Sr. challenged the validation and construction of his deceased wife's will, which devised her entire estate to their daughter Betty Sherman "to dispose of as she has been instructed to do by me" based on oral instructions. The court reversed the trial judge's use of
• Modern Sys. Tech. Corp. v. The United States
  979 F.2d 200· Fed. Cir.· 1992-10-27 ·cited 4×
  A Basic Pricing Agreement (BPA) that does not obligate the government to place any orders, and allows the government to perform services in-house, does not create a binding contract or a requirements contract.
• Ins. Co. OF the State OF Pa. v. Genova Express Lines, Inc.
  605 So. 2d 941· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-09-29 ·cited 4×
  A carrier sought to escape liability for theft of goods by claiming the shipper's loss of the bill of lading defeated any claim against it. The court held that a carrier's liability for failure to deliver goods is not defeated by the shipper's inability to produce the bill of lad
• Superbird Farms v. Perdue Farms
  970 F.2d 238· 7th Cir.· 1992-07-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding the contract ambiguous, allowing extrinsic evidence, and instructing the jury on breach of contract, nor did it err in its handling of the damage award.
• Rosas v. The United States Small Bus. Admin.
  964 F.2d 351· 5th Cir.· 1992-05-21 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed summary judgment, holding that appellants failed to present evidence of fraud, duress, or breach of contract, and that estoppel claims against the government are restricted.
• The Lubrizol Corp. v. Exxon Corp.
  957 F.2d 1302· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Lubrizol's breach of the covenant not to sue was obvious, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in sanctioning Lubrizol for failing to comply with discovery orders by accepting Exxon's proof of attorney's fees.
• Arcor, Inc. v. Textron, Inc.
  960 F.2d 710· 7th Cir.· 1992-04-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying defendants' motions and that the jury's verdict was supported by the evidence, affirming the judgment.
• Edgar H.W. LUM v. City & Cnty. OF Honolulu
  963 F.2d 1167· 9th Cir.· 1992-03-17 ·cited 4×
  The denial of a summary judgment motion is not reviewable on appeal from a final judgment after a full trial on the merits, and damages awarded for a due process violation were not clearly erroneous.
• Cofman v. Acton Corp.
  958 F.2d 494· 1st Cir.· 1992-03-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a reverse stock split did not alter the settlement agreement's payment calculation, as such a maneuver would render the agreement illusory and defy common sense.
• Carroll v. Acme-Cleveland Corp.
  955 F.2d 1107· 7th Cir.· 1992-01-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment for the shareholders, denying Acme's motions to file counterclaims, and excluding evidence, affirming the judgment and sanctions.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Mohamed Anwar M. Hadid
  947 F.2d 1153· 4th Cir.· 1991-10-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court correctly applied the parol evidence rule to bar the oral agreement defense, but erred in awarding attorneys' fees exceeding the actual incurred amount.
• Merk v. Jewel Food Stores Div. OF Jewel Cos.
  945 F.2d 889· 7th Cir.· 1991-09-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that national labor policy does not mandate that collective bargaining agreements be more formal than other contracts, and oral agreements can be enforced even if not submitted to membership ratification.
• Residential Mktg. Grp., Inc. v. Granite Inv. Grp. & James C. Green
  933 F.2d 546· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury's interpretation of 'gross income' was reasonable and that prejudgment interest was properly awarded under Illinois law.
• The Lubrizol Corp. v. Exxon Corp. & Exxon Research & Eng'g Co.
  929 F.2d 960· 3d Cir.· 1991-04-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Lubrizol's claim for reformation of the settlement agreement was barred by the doctrine of claim preclusion because it arose from the same underlying events and could have been litigated in the prior Texas action.
• Sapc, Inc. v. Lotus Dev. Corp.
  921 F.2d 360· 1st Cir.· 1990-12-18 ·cited 4×
  The Asset Purchase Agreement unambiguously transferred or extinguished all of SAPC's rights, including causes of action for prior copyright infringement and related state law claims, as part of the transaction.
• Coscan Fla., Inc. v. Equiventure Florida
  567 So. 2d 17· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-09-11 ·cited 4×
• Lazovitz, Inc. v. Saxon Constr., Inc.
  911 F.2d 588· 11th Cir.· 1990-09-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the general contractor suffered damages when the owner advanced funds for replacement subcontractors, and the owner's payment did not negate the contractor's cause of action against the breaching subcontractor. The court also held that the subcontractor must p
• Wilson Arlington Co. v. Prudential Ins. Co. OF Am.
  912 F.2d 366· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-27 ·cited 4×
  Under Virginia law, the parol evidence rule strictly prohibits the introduction of extrinsic evidence to contradict or modify the terms of an unambiguous integrated written agreement.
• First Union Disc. Brokerage Servs., Inc. v. Milos
  744 F. Supp. 1145· S.D. Fla.· 1990-08-13 ·cited 4×
  The court granted summary judgment for First Union on its claims and the Milos' counterclaim, finding no genuine issue of material fact regarding breach of contract and statutory violations.