Parol Evidence Rule

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

• Willner v. Univ. OF Kan.
  848 F.2d 1020· 10th Cir.· 1988-06-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the parol evidence instruction did not prejudice the plaintiff and that the denial of her untimely motions for recusal was not an abuse of discretion.
• Quincy A. James v. Nico Energy Corp.
  838 F.2d 1365· 5th Cir.· 1988-03-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the statute of frauds barred the breach of contract claim due to an insufficiently described property interest, and that the plaintiff suffered no compensable injury for securities fraud claims.
• Ford Motor Co. v. Northbrook Ins. Co.
  838 F.2d 829· 6th Cir.· 1988-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Ford's scheduled self-insurance qualified as "underlying insurances" under the Northbrook policy's Exclusion P, thus providing coverage for punitive damages.
• Hendricks v. Hendricks
  515 So. 2d 1025· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-10-27 ·cited 2×
  An ex-husband sought to modify his alimony obligation under a marital settlement agreement based on a substantial income reduction. The trial court denied modification, finding the alimony provision non-modifiable, but the appellate court reversed, holding that the provision was
• F.W. Kerr Chem. Co. v. Crandall Assoc., Inc.
  815 F.2d 426· 6th Cir.· 1987-04-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction because the appeal from the denial of the third motion for preliminary injunction was untimely, as the right of appeal arose from the earlier denial of the second motion.
• Cianbro Corp. v. Curran-Lavoie, Inc.
  814 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1987-03-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the settlement agreement was clear and unambiguous, resolving all disputes, and that Cianbro was entitled to set-off the disputed amount from its note payments.
• Emil L. Jeschke v. United States
  814 F.2d 568· 10th Cir.· 1987-03-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that interest accruing on certificates of deposit held in joint tenancy is includible in the gross estate, a joint bank account with survivorship rights in a third party is a terminable interest for marital deduction purposes, and a post-death family agreement does
• Hill v. A.O. Smith Corp.
  801 F.2d 217· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a general release signed by the plaintiffs did not bar claims for feed spoilage if the parties did not intend to cover such unknown issues, but waivers in subsequent extension agreements with the financing company were valid. The court also held that the statu
• In re Cont'l Res. Corp. v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  799 F.2d 622· 10th Cir.· 1986-08-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the use of collateral for a second loan was permissible under the terms of the original loan and participation agreement, and that the loans were of the same class for security purposes.
• Deschler v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Co.
  797 F.2d 695· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that parol evidence cannot be used to contradict an unambiguous, facially complete written employment contract, and that fraud claims based solely on contract breaches are without merit.
• S.P.G. GEM Corp. v. Wolofsky
  488 So. 2d 835· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-02-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the purchasers were entitled to rescission of the option contracts due to the parol evidence rule, but not rescission for the two units where deeds were executed, as the parties had fully performed.
• Bar-Ram Irrigation Prods. v. Phenix-Girard Bank
  779 F.2d 1501· 11th Cir.· 1986-01-13 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the finding of liability against the bank for mishandling drafts but vacated the damages award, remanding for further findings on the proper measure of damages.
• In re The Est. OF Rosa Lee Pearce
  481 So. 2d 69· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-12-31 ·cited 2×
  Parol evidence is admissible to establish a trust in personal property, even if stock certificates are issued in an individual's name, and an attorney's testimony regarding the decedent's intent is not barred by the Dead Man's Statute.
• 1616 Reminc Ltd. P'ship v. Commonwealth Land Title INS. Co.
  778 F.2d 183· 4th Cir.· 1985-11-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court properly found a breach of contract but erred in calculating the interest accrual date; attorney's fees were correctly awarded.
• Merck & Co., Inc. v. U.S. Int'l Trade Comm'n
  774 F.2d 483· Fed. Cir.· 1985-10-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Commission should not have summarily terminated the investigation and must allow Merck to present evidence regarding the parties' intent in the assignment agreement.
• Ponderosa Sys., Inc. v. Brandt
  767 F.2d 668· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that franchisee complaints were admissible business records and relevant to claims of breach of warranty and bad faith, and that promotional literature was admissible to clarify ambiguous contract terms.
• Union OIL Co. OF Cal. v. Serv. OIL Co., Inc.
  766 F.2d 224· 6th Cir.· 1985-06-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the 1975 guaranty remained enforceable because it was not unambiguously terminated by the 1978 cancellation agreement, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for relief under Rule 60(b). However, the dismissal of the antitrus
• Harry F. Chaddick Realty, Inc. v. Maisel
  762 F.2d 534· 7th Cir.· 1985-05-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the term 'leased' in a bonus commission provision of a contract requires a formally executed lease, and the 'ready, willing and able' doctrine does not apply to override this plain meaning for bonus commissions.
• Tandy Brands, Inc. v. Harper
  760 F.2d 648· 5th Cir.· 1985-05-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the covenant not to compete was overbroad in its territorial scope and thus unenforceable for damages, but affirmed the dismissal of Harper's counterclaim for tortious interference with contract due to waiver.
• Mgmt. Sys. Assocs., Inc. v. McDONNELL Douglas Corp.
  762 F.2d 1161· 4th Cir.· 1985-03-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting an exhibit summarizing royalty calculations based on an incorrect interpretation of the contract, and that the parties' contemporaneous construction of the contract supported McAUTO's interpretation.
• Schwartz v. Slawter
  751 F.2d 317· 10th Cir.· 1984-12-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly applied the parol evidence rule to bar evidence of a prior agreement contradicting the integrated escrow agreement, and that the plaintiff failed to prove damages with reasonable certainty using speculative 'pink sheet' stock quota
• J. Perez & CIA., Inc. v. United States
  747 F.2d 813· 1st Cir.· 1984-11-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court had the power to order forfeiture of a supersedeas bond posted to secure a stay of an agency's suspension order, even when the underlying program terminated before the appeal was resolved.
• Spiegel v. Stanley Nelson, Inc.
  458 So. 2d 1175· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-11-07 ·cited 2×
  In a landlord-tenant dispute, the trial court awarded the lessor $17,969 for underreported percentage rent but also awarded the lessee $100,000 on a counterclaim for breach of a lease provision maintaining the shopping center as a first-class retail establishment. The appellate c
• Haeberle v. Tex. Int'l Airlines
  738 F.2d 1434· 5th Cir.· 1984-08-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court should consider extrinsic evidence to determine the meaning of contract terms regarding aircraft condition upon return.
• Ocean Transp. Line, Inc. v. Am. Philippine Fiber Indus., Inc.
  743 F.2d 85· 2d Cir.· 1984-08-14 ·cited 2×
  A guaranty of ocean freight extends to demurrage costs, and a contract's lay-day provisions can imply an obligation to pay reasonable demurrage even if a specific rate is omitted.
• United Cos. Fin. Corp. v. Whitsett
  448 So. 2d 15· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-03-13 ·cited 2×
• Zugelter v. Bank of Am. Nat'l Tr. Fund & Sav. Ass'n
  728 F.2d 218· 3d Cir.· 1984-03-01 ·cited 2×
  A corporate borrower for a business loan in the Virgin Islands cannot invoke usury laws, even if the corporation was formed solely to obtain the loan at the lender's request. Evidence of a prior oral agreement to set a mortgage rate was properly excluded under the parol evidence
• Gibbons v. Graves Constr. Co., Inc.
  727 F.2d 753· 8th Cir.· 1984-02-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the subcontract clearly incorporated the prime contract's indemnity provision, entitling the railroad trustee to indemnity for settlement and expenses.
• Nw., Inc. v. Gulf Asphalt
  443 So. 2d 508· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-01-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding responsibility for asphalt quantity, precluding summary judgment.
• Berryfast, Inc. v. Seymour Zeinfeld and Shirley Zeinfeld
  714 F.2d 826· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding that the Zeinfelds were not personally liable on the promissory notes and that Steel Fastener was entitled to damages for wrongful termination of the distributorship.
• Joseph v. Duran
  436 So. 2d 316· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-08-12 ·cited 2×
  Joseph and his wife appealed a final judgment quieting title to the easterly one-half of an abandoned alley in favor of Duran and Hadden. The court held that when the Morrows conveyed lots abutting the alley to the appellees, they conveyed title to the center line of the alley by
• United States for the Use & Benefit of United Elec. Corp. v. Nat'l Bonding & Accident Ins. Co.
  711 F.2d 131· 9th Cir.· 1983-07-19 ·cited 2×
  Summary judgment for the supplier was inappropriate because the district court failed to consider extrinsic evidence that could make the bond language susceptible to the surety's interpretation regarding coverage.
• Burton Handelsman v. Royal Tr. Bank OF Palm Beach, N.A.
  426 So. 2d 1220· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-02-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the lease provision regarding increased real property taxes was not ambiguous and that the base year for calculating such increases should be 1972, the year the improved property was first assessed.
• Ocean Reef Club, Inc. v. UOP, Inc.
  554 F. Supp. 123· S.D. Fla.· 1982-12-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the service agreement was ambiguous regarding individual bank potability standards, and parol evidence showed the intent for each bank to meet standards. The court found UOP breached the contract but substantially performed, entitling them to payment. The cour
• Airborne Freight Corp. v. Fleming Int'l Airways, Inc.
  423 So. 2d 921· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-11-09 ·cited 2×
  Airborne Freight Corporation appealed a judgment awarding Fleming International Airways damages for breach of a charter agreement. The court affirmed the award for ground service costs but reversed awards for lost profits and repositioning costs, finding insufficient evidence tha
• Jackson v. Chevron Chem. Co.
  679 F.2d 463· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions, admission of evidence, or refusal to admit a deposition, and that the jury's factual findings were supported by adequate evidence.
• Finger Lickin Food Corp. v. Campbell
  407 So. 2d 235· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-11-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court correctly interpreted the lease agreement, finding a latent ambiguity that required reformation to clarify the rent adjustment based on the cost of living index.
• Bestway Equip. Servs., Inc. v. Berwind Lines, Inc.
  655 F.2d 440· 1st Cir.· 1981-07-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Bestway waived its parol evidence rule argument by failing to raise it in the district court and affirmed the jury's verdict on all claims.
• Special JET Servs., Inc. v. Fed. Ins. Co.
  643 F.2d 977· 3d Cir.· 1981-03-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted because a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding whether the insurance policy provided single-pilot coverage as allegedly represented by the insurer's agent.
• Johnson v. Johnson Chevrolet, Inc.
  633 F.2d 716· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment for the dealership because the release's ambiguity regarding the $1,000 settlement payment allowed for parol evidence to determine if the statutory penalty had been paid.
• Carey v. Carey Inv. Corp., Inc.
  385 So. 2d 154· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-06-25 ·cited 2×
  Appellant sold a trailer park to appellee in exchange for cash and two promissory notes. The trial court reformed the larger $140,000 note due to ambiguity, including revising the interest provisions. On appeal, the court affirmed the reformation except for the interest clause, w
• Mularz v. Greater Park City Co.
  623 F.2d 139· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the completion of the bidding and negotiation phase was a promise by the defendant, not a condition precedent to the plaintiff's payment, and thus the plaintiff was entitled to the remaining fee.
• Special Disability Tr. Fund v. Underwriters Adjusting Co. & Modern Tool & Die Co.
  383 So. 2d 1167· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-06-04 ·cited 2×
  The Special Disability Trust Fund appealed a decision requiring it to reimburse an employer for workers' compensation benefits under Florida Statutes § 440.49(4)(e). The court reversed, holding that the statute's reclassification and reimbursement provisions do not apply unless t
• Sellers v. United States
  615 F.2d 1066· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the transfer of stock was not a taxable event because the taxpayer already owned an equity interest, but a cash distribution was taxable as ordinary income.
• United States v. HUB City Volkswagen, Inc.
  625 F.2d 213· 9th Cir.· 1980-04-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the parol evidence rule to bar evidence of an oral condition precedent to the effectiveness of personal loan guaranties.
• Myers v. Am. Fin. Sys. OF Decatur, Inc.
  615 F.2d 368· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment based on an unambiguous accord and satisfaction, as parol evidence was necessary to determine if a meeting of the minds occurred.
• Capp Homes v. Duarte
  617 F.2d 900· 1st Cir.· 1980-03-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a directed verdict for the seller on the buyer's consumer protection counterclaim was improper because the jury's reduced award indicated less than substantial performance, and the timing of the counterclaim was permissible.
• The Plastic Moldings Corp. v. Park Sherman Co.
  606 F.2d 117· 6th Cir.· 1979-09-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a buyer can recover consequential damages for increased production costs and sorting expenses due to defective parts, and can recover restitution for defective molds, but not for a second mold cancelled under a specific clause.
• C. F. Braun & Co. v. Okla. GAS & Elec. Co.
  603 F.2d 132· 10th Cir.· 1979-07-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the contract provision tying the price to an 'area price' was unambiguous and did not allow for extrinsic evidence to establish a different intent.
• Billy Johnson and wife v. Frank Marshall and wife
  382 So. 2d 706· Fla. 1st DCA· 1979-03-06 ·cited 2×
  This case involves a dispute over the boundary line between two parcels of property sold by Hoer to Marshall and Johnson, concerning the division of shoreline frontage.