Parol Evidence Rule

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

• Dyalwood, Inc. v. United States
  588 F.2d 467· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Dyalwood failed to demonstrate a disposal of timber under a contract retaining an economic interest, as required by 26 U.S.C. § 631(b).
• B & J Crane & Rigging, Inc. v. Beker Res. Corp.
  587 F.2d 1065· 10th Cir.· 1978-12-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its findings regarding fraud, New Mexico licensing laws, or contract interpretation, and that state law regarding attorney's fees applies in diversity actions.
• Interstate Fire Ins. Co. v. Harmon
  580 F.2d 184· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the insurance policy was ambiguous regarding coverage for motorcycle events and that parol evidence should be admitted to determine the parties' intent. The court also noted that the agent's authority to bind the insurer was a crucial unresolved issue.
• Floyd v. Segars
  572 F.2d 1018· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding that Segars breached the contract and in ordering specific performance of the stock transfer, as damages would be speculative and the stock unique.
• Bell v. Exxon Co.
  575 F.2d 714· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted on the fraudulent inducement claim due to a factual dispute regarding ostensible authority, but was properly granted on the eviction claim.
• David Nassif Assocs. v. The United States
  557 F.2d 249· Ct. Cl.· 1977-06-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the plaintiff was contractually obligated to provide a cafeteria and that the Government was not within its rights to insist on an 800-seat cafeteria without further justification.
• Arkla AIR Conditioning Co. v. Famous Supply Co. OF Cleveland, Inc.
  551 F.2d 125· 6th Cir.· 1977-03-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an alleged antitrust violation is not a valid defense to the enforcement of a distributorship agreement when the violation was not pleaded and enforcement does not directly facilitate the prohibited restraint.
• Est. of Anton L. Trunk v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  550 F.2d 81· 2d Cir.· 1977-02-02 ·cited 2×
  The Tax Court erred by excluding extrinsic evidence of the testator's intent regarding a bequest, and by misinterpreting the tax apportionment provisions of the will and New York law.
• Richen-Gemco, Inc. v. Heltra, Inc.
  540 F.2d 1235· 4th Cir.· 1976-09-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that royalty payments under the contract are strictly limited to machines covered by the patent claims, not merely those incorporating the basic concept.
• MacCULLEY v. Fid. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Ocala & Century Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Ormond Beach
  335 So. 2d 327· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-07-15 ·cited 2×
  The defendants' personal guarantee obligated them to pay only the next 10% of the $1,040,000 loan ($104,000 plus interest, costs, and reasonable attorney's fees), not the 30% deficiency assessed by the trial court. The guarantee agreement was unambiguous and clearly limited their
• Moreau v. Otis Elevator Co.
  531 F.2d 311· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Otis Elevator Company was not liable for injuries caused by water in the elevator pit because the contract and subsequent warnings excluded such maintenance from their responsibilities.
• Maryan Frances Barker and Florence M. Palen v. The First Nat'l Bank IN Plant City
  325 So. 2d 467· Fla. 2d DCA· 1976-01-21 ·cited 2×
  The executrixes of a deceased's estate sought payment of a $17,000 certificate of deposit that could not be located. The bank conditioned payment on indemnification against potential loss, and the parties disputed whether the certificate was negotiable and whether it had matured.
• United States v. Everett Monte Cristo Hotel, Inc.
  524 F.2d 127· 9th Cir.· 1975-10-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred by failing to properly consider the guarantors' defense of unfulfilled condition precedent and remanded for further proceedings.
• Tiffany Realty, Inc. v. Alvin
  311 So. 2d 832· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-04-08 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court reviewed a dispute arising from a real estate purchase agreement, addressing the seller's entitlement to retain the deposit and recover mortgage interest, and the purchaser's right to recover the deposit.
• Ruffin v. Mercury Record Prods., Inc.
  513 F.2d 222· 6th Cir.· 1975-03-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that oral promises made before a written contract are barred by the parol evidence rule, and oral promises made after the contract are unenforceable due to lack of consideration.
• Mar-Len Hous. Enters., Inc. v. Mar-Len Gardens "I" Corp.
  302 So. 2d 469· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-10-15 ·cited 2×
  Mar-Len Housing Enterprises appealed a trial court's decree determining the proper computation of a management fee under a 99-year management contract with twelve cooperative apartment corporations. The court held that the December 20, 1965 agreement excluding mortgage, lease, an
• Westinghouse Credit Corp. v. Grandoff Invs., Inc.
  297 So. 2d 104· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-06-12 ·cited 2×
  Westinghouse Credit Corporation leased office space in the Ross Building under a lease describing 1,296 square feet, but actually occupied 1,735 square feet. After Westinghouse vacated, new owner Grandoff Investments sought rent for the extra 439 square feet based on an implied c
• Hitchcock v. Peter Kiewit & Sons Co., Inc.
  479 F.2d 1257· 10th Cir.· 1973-06-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred by instructing the jury that contract provisions were incidental as a matter of law, thereby preventing the jury from determining the contract's main purpose and the proper measure of damages.
• Graham v. Graham
  277 So. 2d 540· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-05-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the agreement was unambiguous and the trial court erred in admitting extrinsic evidence to interpret it.
• H & J Foods, Inc. v. Reeder
  477 F.2d 1053· 9th Cir.· 1973-04-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an assignment of a trademark must clearly specify the right to sue for past infringements to recover pre-assignment damages, and that the assignment of the trademark 'Hunza' to H & J Foods, Inc. was valid despite the sale of minimal tangible assets.
• In re Fin. Computer Sys., Inc. v. Clements-Appellee
  474 F.2d 1258· 9th Cir.· 1973-02-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that admitting oral evidence to establish a purchase option, contradicting a written lease agreement, violated the statute of frauds because no writing indicated a contract for sale.
• Mack v. Earle M. Jorgensen Co.
  467 F.2d 1177· 7th Cir.· 1972-09-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a written employment agreement, found to be an integrated contract, barred evidence of a prior oral agreement due to the parol evidence rule, and that the plaintiff's other claims lacked sufficient proof.
• Medigroup, Inc. v. Schildknecht
  463 F.2d 525· 7th Cir.· 1972-06-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a plaintiff must prove actual damages from omitted liabilities before recovering, and that parol evidence was admissible to interpret the ambiguous phrase 'ordinary course of business' in the contract.
• Robbins Tire & Rubber Co., Inc. v. United States
  462 F.2d 684· 5th Cir.· 1972-06-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the language of the offer in compromise was unambiguous and that the trial court erred in submitting the interpretation of the contract to the jury.
• Thompson-Starrett Int'l, Inc. v. Tropic Plumbing
  457 F.2d 1349· 3d Cir.· 1972-03-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding the parties' intent concerning FHA approval of change orders.
• AETNA Ins. Co. v. Newton
  456 F.2d 655· 3d Cir.· 1972-03-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that parol evidence is inadmissible to contradict the clear terms of an integrated agreement, and an insured cannot recover from its insurer for liabilities arising from a contract that waived subrogation rights without insurer consent.
• Baca Land & Cattle Co. & Dunigan Tool & Supply Co. v. George W. Savage under Liquidating Tr. Agreement
  440 F.2d 867· 10th Cir.· 1971-04-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the timber reservation included all future forest growth and that while clear cutting is permissible, it must be accompanied by reasonable corrective measures to mitigate land damage, with damages awarded for the cost of these measures.
• Richardson v. VAN Dolah
  429 F.2d 912· 9th Cir.· 1970-07-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in decreeing rescission without allowing the vendor a reasonable opportunity to perfect title, and that evidence of the purchaser's actual notice of title defects should have been admitted.
• Brown v. First Ins. Co. OF Haw., Ltd.
  424 F.2d 680· 9th Cir.· 1970-03-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the insurer was not estopped from denying coverage because there was no misrepresentation regarding post-policy accident occurrences, and the policy clearly stated coverage was limited to accidents within the policy period.
• Anne Brennan Nalle v. The First Nat'l Bank OF Baltimore
  412 F.2d 881· 4th Cir.· 1969-07-10 ·cited 2×
  A settlement agreement, supported by adequate consideration and entered into by an authorized representative, bars a claim to the principal of an inter vivos trust.
• Reports Corp. v. Tech. Publ'g Co.
  411 F.2d 168· 7th Cir.· 1969-05-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an oral promise to assume a debt could be enforced despite a written agreement that omitted the promise, as the parties did not intend the writing to be a complete integration of their agreement.
• United States ex rel. Rex Sterling v. Pate
  403 F.2d 425· 7th Cir.· 1968-11-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in considering parol testimony to resolve ambiguity in the trial record regarding attorney presence at a guilty plea.
• Roquemore v. Ford Motor Co.
  400 F.2d 255· 5th Cir.· 1968-09-03 ·cited 2×
  A real estate agent who acts as a fiduciary for a buyer owes duties of integrity and candor, and cannot profit from self-dealing, even when dealing with a large corporation.
• Ford v. Int'l Harvester Co.
  399 F.2d 749· 9th Cir.· 1968-08-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an action for breach of an oral contract accrues at the date of the breach, not when damages are discovered or fully realized, and is barred by the statute of limitations if not filed within three years of the initial breach.
• Smith Canning & Freezing Co. v. Lloyd Krause, Inc.
  398 F.2d 128· 9th Cir.· 1968-07-19 ·cited 2×
  A contract carrier cannot recover amounts beyond the filed and approved rate, even if the parties colluded to operate at a lower rate, because the filed rate is the only lawful charge.
• Great Am. Ins. Co. v. Anderson
  395 F.2d 913· 6th Cir.· 1968-06-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that parol evidence of oral permission was admissible to show the driver was an insured under the policy, even if a written lease agreement restricted such use.
• The Home Ins. Co. v. Hamilton
  395 F.2d 108· 6th Cir.· 1968-05-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the lessor's mere consent to the removal of tile did not make the lessee's employees agents of the lessor, and the jury's finding to the contrary was unsupported by evidence.
• Mar. Overseas Corp. v. Puerto RICO Drydock & Marine Terminals, Inc.
  391 F.2d 1010· 1st Cir.· 1968-03-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the joint surveys constituted agreements on fixed prices for insurance damage repairs, but remanded for a determination of the reasonableness of subcontractor Abarca's mark-up on owner's account work.
• Int'l Paper Co. v. Standard Indus., Inc.
  389 F.2d 99· 10th Cir.· 1968-02-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in excluding parol evidence regarding the parties' intent concerning which plans and specifications governed the contract.
• Parks v. Baldwin Piano & Organ Co. & Albert McConnell
  386 F.2d 828· 2d Cir.· 1967-11-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the dealership agreement was terminable at will and removal of merchandise was authorized by its terms.
• Andrews v. Deering Milliken, Inc.
  382 F.2d 799· 6th Cir.· 1967-10-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the agreement's exclusion clause for invalidated patents did not extend to royalties from a valid trademark, entitling the plaintiff to his share of trademark licensing profits.
• Olin's Tire Serv., Inc. v. United States Rubber Co.
  382 F.2d 852· 5th Cir.· 1967-09-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on the breach of warranty claim, as the plaintiff's alleged losses from excessive adjustments were not fully resolved by the reimbursement provisions.
• P & Z Pac., Inc. v. Panorama Apts., Inc.
  372 F.2d 759· 9th Cir.· 1967-01-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the contractor could not recover for misrepresentation or breach of warranty based on soil reports that accurately reflected boring results, as the reports were indicative, not guarantees of uniform conditions. The court also held that unanticipated difficulti
• The United States v. The Clementon Sewerage Auth.
  365 F.2d 609· 3d Cir.· 1966-07-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the preliminary studies were a separable part of the contract, and Wise was entitled to payment for them despite failing to complete final plans within cost limitations.
• Julien E. Balogh v. Cleys
  185 So. 2d 190· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-04-05 ·cited 2×
  Cleys sold his loan company stock to Balogh in 1958 under an agreement entitling Cleys to tax savings from business losses for five years post-closing. The trial court awarded Cleys $4,090.22 for carry-back tax losses, but the appellate court reversed, finding no evidence Cleys r
• Hester v. Tempest OIL Co., Inc.
  357 F.2d 164· 5th Cir.· 1966-02-28 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment, agreeing that appellant failed to produce written evidence of title to the oil and gas lease as required by Louisiana law.
• Triscaro v. The Union Labor Life Ins. Co., Inc.
  355 F.2d 1· 6th Cir.· 1966-01-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the insurance company could offset a prior year's deficit against the current year's divisible surplus under the group insurance policies, as the policy granted the company discretion to ascertain and apportion dividends in good faith.
• Buhler v. Travelers Indem. Co.
  174 So. 2d 59· Fla. 3d DCA· 1965-04-13 ·cited 2×
  The Buhlers, who owned and operated Miami Shipbuilding Corporation, executed a written indemnity agreement with Travelers Indemnity Company. When the shipbuilding company defaulted on a construction contract and the surety paid claims, Travelers sued the individual Buhlers for th
• Scaduto v. Orlando
  340 F.2d 293· 2d Cir.· 1965-01-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the subcontract incorporated by reference certain specifications of the prime contract related to rock excavation and removal, and that Orlando's withholding of payments based on creditor claims was not justified under the subcontract's indemnity clause.
• In re 716 Third Ave. Holding Corp. v. A. G. V. Assocs., Inc.
  340 F.2d 42· 2d Cir.· 1964-12-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the transaction, appearing as an assignment with an option to repurchase, may in fact be a mortgage, and the referee erred by not considering all evidence, particularly the property's value, to determine its true nature.