Parol Evidence Rule

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

• Barnett Banks Tr. Co., N.A. v. Titusville Assocs., Ltd.
  560 So. 2d 1337· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-05-03 ·cited 4×
  Barnett Banks Trust Company, as trustee for bondholders, appealed from a declaratory judgment that limited its recovery to $750,000 from operating deficit security, holding that a letter of credit and personal guarantee were separate obligations. The court reversed, holding that
• Ehrhardt v. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  902 F.2d 664· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the postnuptial agreement was relevant to Maxine's damages claim, and Penn Mutual should have been allowed to present evidence and argue its waiver and estoppel defenses to the jury. The court also held that the district court erred in its jury instruction reg
• Wickenheiser v. Ramm Vending Promotion, Inc.
  560 So. 2d 350· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-04-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding the conditional delivery of the distributorship agreement, precluding summary judgment on the seller's counterclaim.
• W. Fireproofing Co. v. W.R. Grace & Co.
  896 F.2d 286· 8th Cir.· 1990-02-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that evidence of oral misrepresentations is admissible to prove fraud in the inducement of a contract, even if it contradicts the written terms, and that a flawed jury instruction on punitive damages requires a new trial unless the plaintiff accepts a remittitur of
• Thomas v. Hartman
  553 So. 2d 1256· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-11-09 ·cited 4×
  The Thomases purchased a Tennessee farm from Hartman, a licensed real estate broker, financed in part by a promissory note secured by a mortgage on Hartman's home. When Hartman defaulted, the Thomases discovered the mortgage was subordinate to a first mortgage, leaving them witho
• Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. v. Homes Int'l Dev. Corp.
  721 F. Supp. 290· S.D. Fla.· 1989-09-07 ·cited 4×
  The D'Oench, Duhme doctrine estops Twin from asserting its mechanics lien priority against FSLIC, as the doctrine protects FSLIC from unrecorded agreements that could mislead it in assessing the value of assets acquired from failed financial institutions.
• Langer v. Monarch Life Ins. Co.
  879 F.2d 75· 3d Cir.· 1989-07-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the employment contract's disability insurance provision was ambiguous and that the parties' course of performance created a latent ambiguity, precluding summary judgment for the employer. The court also remanded for reconsideration of the motion to amend the
• Thomas J. Kline, Inc. v. Lorillard, Inc.
  878 F.2d 791· 4th Cir.· 1989-06-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury's finding of a requirements contract was supported by evidence and that credit terms are part of the price under the Robinson-Patman Act.
• Wash. Pub. Power Supply Sys. v. Pittsburgh-Des Moines Corp.
  876 F.2d 690· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the terms 'defective' and 'nonconforming' in Modification 164 are ambiguous and do not exclusively refer to warranty claims, and that the special fund doctrine limits PDM's collection of its judgment to the WNP-4/5 revenue funds.
• Trebor Sportswear Co., Inc. v. THE Ltd. Stores, Inc.
  865 F.2d 506· 2d Cir.· 1989-01-12 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the summary judgment, finding the draft agreement sufficient to satisfy the statute of frauds and admissible under Rule 408.
• Hershon v. Gibraltar Bldg. & Loan Ass'n, Inc.
  864 F.2d 848· D.C. Cir.· 1989-01-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the parol evidence rule should not be used to thwart the parties' intent when a contract is ambiguous, even if superficially clear.
• A. Kemp Fisheries, Inc. v. Castle & Cooke, Inc.
  852 F.2d 493· 9th Cir.· 1988-07-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the charter agreement was an integrated contract and the trial court erred in admitting parol evidence to vary its terms or enforce warranties not contained within it. The court also found that the implied warranty of seaworthiness was effectively waived.
• Nat'l Broad. Co., Inc. v. Copyright Royalty Tribunal
  848 F.2d 1289· D.C. Cir.· 1988-06-07 ·cited 4×
  The Copyright Royalty Tribunal (CRT) has no authority to interpret contracts to determine copyright ownership for royalty distribution; such disputes must be resolved through private litigation. The CRT's distribution of royalties to the syndicator as a general rule is permissibl
• Peeples Constr. Co., Inc. v. Escoe Green, Inc.
  522 So. 2d 493· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-03-17 ·cited 4×
  Peeples Construction appeals a jury verdict awarding Escoe Green $14,833.32 for breach of contract. The court reverses, finding that the subcontract's language requiring work "as shown and called for on the plans and specifications" unambiguously required permanent asphalt patchi
• FR. Winkler KG v. Stoller
  839 F.2d 1002· 3d Cir.· 1988-02-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the parol evidence rule barred Stoller's defense that his guarantee was a mere formality and would never be enforced, and that his 'per aval' signature constituted a personal guarantee waiving notice of dishonor.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Tenn. Wildcat Servs., Inc.
  839 F.2d 251· 6th Cir.· 1988-02-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that when a principal is clearly identified on the face of a promissory note and the word 'by' precedes the signer's signature, this is sufficient to establish that the signer acted in a representative capacity, thus avoiding personal liability.
• Foucart v. A.B. Paul, Jr.
  516 So. 2d 1035· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-12-10 ·cited 4×
  Sandra Foucart appeals the trial court's denial of her partition suit and invalidation of a deed conveying her mother's one-half interest in Florida real property. The appellate court reverses, holding that the mother's conveyance to Foucart validly severed a joint tenancy with r
• In re Atchison v. Atchison
  832 F.2d 1236· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-23 ·cited 4×
  A debtor can grant a valid security interest in collateral they do not personally own, provided they have rights in it, such as permission from the owner to use it as collateral. The parol evidence rule prevents a debtor from denying their intent to grant a security interest when
• Elec. Switching Indus., Inc. v. Faradyne Elecs. Corp.
  833 F.2d 418· 2d Cir.· 1987-11-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Gayshen was liable for the balance due on the purchase contract, and that plaintiff's damages under the service contract were too speculative due to plaintiff's own breach of the traffic engineering clause.
• Auer v. Kawasaki Motors Corp.
  830 F.2d 535· 4th Cir.· 1987-10-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that federal common law governs the effect of a settlement with one tortfeasor on other joint tortfeasors in federal cases, including diversity actions.
• Hershey Foods Corp. v. Ralph Chapek, Inc.
  828 F.2d 989· 3d Cir.· 1987-09-11 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes parol evidence should be admitted to show the October 30 letter was not a fully integrated agreement.
• Grooms v. Grooms
  510 So. 2d 1215· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-08-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a prior judicial adjudication of a property settlement agreement is final and cannot be revisited by a subsequent trial judge to alter or add to the agreement.
• Mut. Fire v. Fla. Testing & Eng'g Co.
  511 So. 2d 360· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-07-09 ·cited 4×
  An insurance policy endorsement excluding liability for claims arising from work performed on the Flagler County Courthouse was ambiguous because it used the singular "insured" without clearly identifying which named insured was excluded, and extrinsic evidence was properly admit
• Hoover v. Valley West D M
  823 F.2d 227· 8th Cir.· 1987-07-09 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision to grant relief from a default judgment and the trial court's reduction of damages, finding no reversible error in the admission of evidence or the jury's findings on remaining damages.
• Gamal S. Henein v. Saudi Arabian Parsons Ltd.
  818 F.2d 1508· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the employer was justified in terminating the employee's contract due to the Saudi Arabian government's order of banishment, and that the employee's other claims lacked admissible evidence or were time-barred.
• Hall Constr. Co., Inc. v. Beynon
  507 So. 2d 1225· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-06-04 ·cited 4×
  Hall Construction appeals a judgment requiring its subcontractor to pay $4,500 in liquidated damages for construction delays. The court affirms, holding that the purchase order's liquidated damages clause is clear and unambiguous, precluding recovery of additional actual damages
• In re Est. OF Harry T. Whitley
  508 So. 2d 455· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-05-27 ·cited 4×
  This appeal concerns whether a $100,000 promissory note was a valid asset of the decedent's estate. The court affirmed the probate court's finding that a cancellation clause in the note—which voided the debt if the payee failed to demand payment before the payee's death—was enfor
• Clark v. A.A. Ryan, Jr.
  818 F.2d 1102· 4th Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Agreement's language regarding trust fund contributions is ambiguous and that parol evidence supports the interpretation that contributions were only required for union members.
• First v. Alton Carver and Joyce H. Carver
  504 So. 2d 50· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-03-18 ·cited 4×
  Appellants sold ten acres to appellees with a mortgage agreement allowing for partial releases of subdivided lots upon payment. After appellees paid the full mortgage balance and sought partial releases, appellants refused to execute them. The trial court awarded appellees attorn
• Nagelbush v. Capozzi and Margaret A. Capozzi
  504 So. 2d 782· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-03-17 ·cited 4×
  Co-signers of a promissory note and mortgage appealed a summary judgment entered against them by a lender. The court reversed, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding alleged fraudulent inducement based on secret oral agreements that would have affected each party's lia
• Mhoon v. Singleton
  503 So. 2d 374· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-02-13 ·cited 4×
  In this divorce-related appeal, the court affirmed the dismissal of a former husband's complaint seeking indemnification or contribution from his ex-wife for a mortgage debt on property awarded to her in the dissolution. The court held that the unambiguous settlement agreement pr
• Tropicana Club, Inc. v. James H. Topping, Inc.
  502 So. 2d 29· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-01-16 ·cited 4×
  Tropicana Club, a condominium association, appealed a quiet title judgment denying it ownership of two undeveloped lots that the developer Topping chose not to develop as Phase II. The court affirmed the trial court's finding that the developer retained title to the lots, but rev
• Jackman v. Wmac Inv. Corp.
  809 F.2d 377· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the stock incentive plan's language was unambiguous and parol evidence was inadmissible to vary its terms, and that the award of attorney's fees was not an abuse of discretion.
• P.F. Manley v. Plasti-Line, Inc.
  808 F.2d 468· 6th Cir.· 1987-01-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding the parties' contractual intent concerning the scope of the commission clause.
• Juster v. Montgomery Ward Dev. Corp.
  496 So. 2d 851· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-09-24 ·cited 4×
  Martin Juster, who purchased Floriland's interest in a shopping mall, sued Montgomery Ward entities for underpayment of common area maintenance charges under a 1971 reciprocal operating agreement. The Florida appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment for Ward, holding t
• Penthouse Int'l, Ltd. v. Barnes
  792 F.2d 943· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the agent acted within his implied actual authority in modifying the contract by adding 'AKA,' and that this modification meant Penthouse could only publish the photographs under a fictitious name. However, the court reversed the portion of the relief ordering
• In re Martin Grinding & Mach. Works, Inc.
  793 F.2d 592· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-23 ·cited 4×
  Under the Illinois Uniform Commercial Code, loan documents cannot supplement an unambiguous security agreement to expand the scope of secured collateral to include property inadvertently omitted from the security agreement's description.
• Condit Chem. & Grain Co., Inc. v. Helena Chem. Corp.
  789 F.2d 1101· 5th Cir.· 1986-05-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a state rule of civil procedure requiring agreements touching pending suits to be in writing is a rule of substance, not procedure, and thus applies in a federal diversity case.
• Searle v. Fortune Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n
  480 So. 2d 187· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-12-18 ·cited 4×
  Fortune Federal filed a promissory note collection action against Searle in Pinellas County. The trial court denied Searle's motion to transfer venue, erroneously applying the parol evidence rule to exclude his affidavit about where the note was executed and his residence. The ap
• United States v. Mark Twain Bank-Kansas City
  771 F.2d 361· 8th Cir.· 1985-08-21 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the judgment against 2001 Computerized Consultants, Inc., finding it was not a holder in due course, but remanded for further factual findings regarding Arthur Selectman's status.
• United States v. McLAIN
  769 F.2d 500· 8th Cir.· 1985-08-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the language used in the assumption agreement was unambiguous and created personal liability for the debt.
• Montwood Corp. v. HOT Springs Theme Park Corp.
  766 F.2d 359· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-28 ·cited 4×
• R.A. Gilbert v. Scratch 'N Smell, Inc.
  756 F.2d 320· 4th Cir.· 1985-03-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the lower courts' factual findings were not clearly erroneous, as the evidence supported the conclusion that the parties intended a complete settlement and abandoned the overbilling claim.
• Horan v. Horan
  464 So. 2d 224· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-02-27 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court affirmed the denial of a motion to continue a contempt hearing but reversed the dismissal of a petition to set aside a property settlement agreement. The court found that the husband had presented a prima facie case of fraud regarding an oral promise made by t
• Contractor Util. Sales Co., Inc. v. Certain-Teed Corp.
  748 F.2d 1151· 7th Cir.· 1984-11-09 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evidentiary rulings and that punitive damages and pre-judgment interest were properly awarded or denied under Pennsylvania law.
• Laurence Gerard & Firejet Am., Ltd. v. Almouli
  746 F.2d 936· 2d Cir.· 1984-10-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a preliminary injunction because the appellees failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and an inadequate remedy at law.
• Universal Drilling Co. v. Camay Drilling Co.
  737 F.2d 869· 10th Cir.· 1984-06-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that extrinsic evidence was inadmissible under the parol evidence rule and that express warranties by description could be disclaimed in a contract between sophisticated businessmen for the sale of used equipment.
• Yarn Indus., Inc. v. Krupp Int'l, Inc.
  736 F.2d 125· 4th Cir.· 1984-06-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that collateral estoppel did not bar Yarn from litigating the meaning and enforceability of the choice-of-forum clause, and that the parol evidence rule did not bar evidence of mutual mistake regarding the clause's intent.
• In re Potts v. Potts
  724 F.2d 47· 6th Cir.· 1984-01-06 ·cited 4×
  Testimony regarding the parties' intent at the time of deed delivery is admissible to show title did not pass, and the parol evidence rule does not bar such evidence when offered to prove lack of complete delivery.
• Se. Banks Tr. Co., N.A. v. Higginbotham Chevrolet-Oldsmobile, Inc.
  445 So. 2d 347· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-01-05 ·cited 4×
  A state court guilty plea does not bar a subsequent federal civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for an alleged Fourth Amendment violation that was never litigated in the state proceedings.