Parol Evidence Rule

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

• Chicago v. Menhall
  131 F.2d 117· 7th Cir.· 1942-11-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the exception in the deeds was void for uncertainty, meaning all oil and gas rights passed to the grantee, and that defendants did not acquire title to those rights through adverse possession of the surface.
• ART Metal Const. Co. v. Lehigh Structural Steel Co.
  126 F.2d 134· 3d Cir.· 1942-01-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that parol evidence is admissible under Pennsylvania law to show that an assignment, absolute in form, was intended as collateral security only, and that the plaintiff's claim failed because the parties concluded their affairs before the plaintiff changed his posit
• Simon v. H. F. Wilcox OIL & GAS Co.
  123 F.2d 25· 10th Cir.· 1941-10-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the contract was a sale of an interest in an oil lease, not a loan, and that the pledgee's purchase of collateral stock at a public sale, with notice to the pledgor's representative, did not violate Oklahoma public policy.
• Maier v. Cont'l Oil Co.
  120 F.2d 237· 7th Cir.· 1941-02-21 ·cited 2×
• Borin Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
  117 F.2d 917· 6th Cir.· 1941-02-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the basis for depreciation and gain/loss calculation is the purchase price stated in the second, rescinding contract, as the parties validly rescinded the first contract.
• Kline v. Yokom
  117 F.2d 370· 7th Cir.· 1941-02-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that oral testimony was inadmissible to contradict a clear written agreement and that the compromise of a doubtful claim constituted sufficient consideration for the agreement.
• Globe Grain & Milling Co. v. De Tweede Nw. & Pac. Hypotheekbank
  69 F.2d 418· 9th Cir.· 1934-02-23 ·cited 2×
  The District Court correctly excluded parol evidence offered to prove oral consent for the removal of mortgaged wheat, as the applicable Idaho statute required written consent. The removal of the wheat from the state without such written consent constituted conversion, and the in
• Duell v. Greiner (two cases)
  S.D. Fla.· 1926-09-29 ·cited 2×
  District court denied plaintiff's motion to strike defendant's equitable plea in a common-law promissory note action, holding that a defendant may raise equitable defenses including partnership claims and bring in new parties under Section 274b of the Judicial Code.
• Kingston v. Boone
  92 Fla. 560· Fla.· 1926-08-05 ·cited 2×
  Kingston sought specific performance of a real estate purchase contract with Boone. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint because the property description in the contract was too vague and could not be identified without parol evidence, which is inadmi
• Davis Mercantile Co. v. Gillett
  82 Fla. 340· Fla.· 1921-11-04 ·cited 2×
  This case involves an appeal from an order striking portions of a defendant's answer in a mortgage foreclosure suit. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision, finding the defenses raised in the stricken portions of the answer to be insufficient.
• Chas. H. Brown v. Booth
  73 Fla. 67· Fla.· 1917-01-01 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court denied a rehearing, affirming that a defendant can claim the privilege to be sued in their county of residence, even if the cause of action accrued elsewhere, provided service was made in the county of residence.
• Cottondale State Bank v. Burroughs Adding Mach. Co.
  61 Fla. 143· Fla.· 1911-01-01 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment against Cottondale State Bank in a contract action brought by Burroughs Adding Machine Company, finding that the trial court improperly excluded evidence supporting the bank's affirmative defenses regarding authorization and the machi
• Davis Clary v. Isom
  56 Fla. 236· Fla.· 1908-06-01 ·cited 2×
  Davis Clary sued J. M. Isom on a promissory note for the purchase of a sawmill business. Isom defended by claiming failure of consideration, arguing he did not know he was assuming liability for outstanding equipment financing from a third party. The Florida Supreme Court affirme
• Wm. W. Bailey v. Finlayson
  25 Fla. 153· Fla.· 1889-01-01 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of a bill seeking to enforce a marriage settlement trust deed executed by Mary B. Bailey on her wedding day in 1883. The court found the deed was procured through the undue influence of Bailey's mother and that Bailey validly exercis
• Johnson v. the Pensacola & Ga. R.R. Co.
  9 Fla. 299· Fla.· 1860-01-01 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a judgment in favor of the Pensacola and Georgia Railroad Company in an assumpsit action to recover stock subscription calls from Calvin Johnson. The Court held that the railroad's acceptance of the Internal Improvement Act of 1855 and a subsequ
• Orman v. J. & D. J. Day & the Apalachicola Land Co.
  5 Fla. 385· Fla.· 1853-01-01 ·cited 2×
  This case involves a dispute over the cost of a shared partition wall between two adjacent lots. The court held that the owner who built the wall without the express consent or agreement of the adjacent landowner or their lessees could not claim contribution for the expense.
• Broadmoor Ventures, LLC v. Super Heat & Air, LLC
  432 So. 3d 609· Fla. 2d DCA· 2026-02-20 ·cited 1×
  In this commercial lease dispute, the Second District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's judgment in favor of Super Heat regarding a purchase option exercised under a lease containing a subordination clause. The court held that Super Heat's purchase option is subject to a s
• Roskovensky v. Sanibel Captiva Island Vacation Rentals, LLC
  2020 WL 13228407· M.D. Fla.· 2024-03-15 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the invoice created an unambiguous license for all pre-existing images and that the patent ambiguity in the license duration must be construed against the drafter, extending the license for six months.
• Bartolotta v. Bartolotta
  380 So. 3d 535· Fla. 2d DCA· 2024-02-28 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's interpretation of a marital settlement agreement (MSA). The court held that the MSA's clear language regarding the equal distribution of retirement benefits controlled over statutory definitions of marital assets, meaning the former wi
• TPC Overtown Block 45, LLC v. Downtown Retail Assocs., LLC
  369 So. 3d 350· Fla. 3d DCA· 2023-08-16 ·cited 1×
  This case involves a dispute over a contract for the sale of membership interests in a development company. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment, finding that the contract's terms were clear and unambiguous and that no breach occurred.
• Fiddlesticks Country Club, Inc. v. Shaw
  363 So. 3d 1177· Fla. 6th DCA· 2023-05-05 ·cited 1×
  The court reversed a summary judgment ruling that homeowners had a vested contractual right to a fully refundable assessment based on the club's bylaws. The appellate court found that the bylaws, which were subject to amendment by majority vote, did not create such a vested right
• Fendrich v. Murphy
  353 So. 3d 1194· Fla. 4th DCA· 2023-01-18 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court reversed an enforcement order regarding child support for college expenses. It found the marital settlement agreement's "college expenses" term was latently ambiguous and required parol evidence, and that the trial court erred by not considering the father's a
• In re Amendments to Rules Regulating The Fla. Bar – Rules 3-7.6 & 3-7.10
  327 So. 3d 256· Fla.· 2022-06-02 ·cited 1×
  The Florida Supreme Court adopted proposed amendments to Rules Regulating The Florida Bar 3-7.6 and 3-7.10 in response to its prior decision in Florida Bar re Murtha, which held that civil mediation was inappropriate in bar reinstatement proceedings. The amendments clarify that c
• Bd. of Regents of the State of Fla. v. Rowsey
  320 So. 3d 954· Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-05-26 ·cited 1×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's judgment in favor of an employee, finding that the employee breached a settlement agreement by failing to provide all requested documents and that the agreement did not include an unwritten promise of additional payment. The court emph
• Morris v. MGZ Props., LLC.
  251 So. 3d 929· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-07-18 ·cited 1×
  The term "sale" in a contract is unambiguous and means any transfer of title, including foreclosure sales, and must be applied according to its plain and ordinary meaning without resort to parol evidence.
• Waters v. Wilmington Tr.
  14 Fla. L. Weekly 1594· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-06-13 ·cited 1×
  A substituted plaintiff in a foreclosure action must establish that the original plaintiff possessed the promissory note at the time the complaint was filed, and producing the original note after suit commenced does not satisfy this standing requirement.
• Boardwalk AT Daytona Dev., LLC v. Panormitis K. Paspalakis
  220 So. 3d 457· Fla. 5th DCA· 2016-11-18 ·cited 1×
  Boardwalk at Daytona Development appeals a specific performance decree requiring it to convey real property to Paspalakis and others based on a mediated settlement agreement. The court reverses, holding that the agreement's description of the land to be conveyed was too ambiguous
• Wright v. Czariki
  142 So. 3d 924· Fla. 2d DCA· 2014-07-11 ·cited 1×
  Mary Ellen Wright appealed a trial court judgment in a breach of contract and foreclosure action against the Czarikis, who purchased her business and real property. The appellate court affirmed the right to foreclose on the real property but reversed and remanded on all other iss
• Advent OIL & Operating, Inc. v. S & E Enters., LLC
  48 So. 3d 70· Fla. 1st DCA· 2010-10-07 ·cited 1×
  Appellants entered into a Joint Venture Ownership Agreement with Appellee regarding a saltwater disposal well in Oklahoma. The central dispute involved whether Appellants' contractual obligations ended once the well became capable of receiving sufficient saltwater, or whether the
• Saregama India Ltd. v. Mosley
  687 F. Supp. 2d 1325· S.D. Fla.· 2009-12-23 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the 1967 agreement conveyed at most a two-year exclusive license and a non-exclusive license thereafter, not a copyright assignment, and that the sampled portion of the song was de minimis.
• Johnson v. Gulf Cnty.
  26 So. 3d 33· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-12-22 ·cited 1×
  Johnson challenged Gulf County's failure to enforce its comprehensive plan and land development regulations against Rish's clearing and filling of wetlands on his property near Johnson's home. The appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment, holding that the County erred
• Sewell v. D'Alessandro & Woodyard, Inc.
  655 F. Supp. 2d 1228· M.D. Fla.· 2009-09-10 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Second Amended Complaint adequately pled successor liability and stated claims for securities fraud and other violations, denying motions to dismiss on these grounds.
• Bernstein v. NEW Beginnings Tr., LLC.
  988 So. 2d 90· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-07-16 ·cited 1×
  The Bernsteins appealed orders in an eviction proceeding arising from a disputed real estate transaction with New Beginnings. The trial court granted summary judgment finding the transaction was a valid sale and leaseback, ordering the Bernsteins to deposit unpaid rent into the c
• Maguire v. S. Homes of Palm Beach, L.L.C.
  591 F. Supp. 2d 1263· S.D. Fla.· 2008-06-17 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the purchase agreement was exempt from the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act because the contractual obligation to build within two years was not illusory, but the breach of contract claim was sufficiently pleaded.
• J. Lynn Constr., Inc. v. The Fairways AT Boca Golf & Tennis Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
  962 So. 2d 928· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-07-05 ·cited 1×
  J. Lynn Construction (Lynn Roofing) appealed a summary judgment in favor of The Fairways at Boca Golf & Tennis Condominium Association, arguing that the association waived and modified the contract requirement for a performance bond by accepting a personal guaranty and modified p
• Goswami v. Lennox Indus., Inc.
  947 So. 2d 1221· Fla. 1st DCA· 2007-01-26 ·cited 1×
  Where an asset purchase agreement contains conflicting or ambiguous provisions regarding assumed liabilities relating to patents, and those provisions might support an inference that a royalty obligation was assumed, summary judgment is improper and the matter must proceed to tri
• Marino v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
  190 F. Supp. 820· S.D. Fla.· 2007-01-24 ·cited 1×
  The court held that Plaintiff's motion for class certification must be denied because common issues of law or fact do not predominate and a class action is not the superior method for adjudication, particularly given the need to apply fifty different state laws.
• Peters v. Ojeda
  902 So. 2d 219· Fla. 3d DCA· 2005-05-11 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the defendants' affidavits, along with evidence of how loan proceeds were used, created a genuine issue of material fact regarding the loan's purpose.
• Cavallaro v. Stratford Homes, Inc.
  784 So. 2d 619· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-05-25 ·cited 1×
  The court held that no enforceable contract existed because the parties did not reach a meeting of the minds on essential terms and any purported agreement was unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds.
• Hazara Enters., Inc. v. Motiva Enters., LLC
  126 F. Supp. 2d 1365· S.D. Fla.· 2000-12-21 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the franchisor's voluntary termination of an underlying ground lease, even without an explicit 'option to extend,' constituted a loss of leasehold that required offering assignment of the remaining lease term to the franchisee under the PMPA. However, the cour
• ALI R. Ghahramani, M.D., P.A. v. Pablo A. Guzman, M.D., P.A.
  768 So. 2d 535· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-10-11 ·cited 1×
  Ghahramani and Guzman, two physicians, disputed a settlement agreement reached during mediation that released Guzman from a non-compete clause and required Ghahramani to pay $200,000. Ghahramani refused payment, claiming he only meant to release past breaches, not future ones. Th
• Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Hous. Author.
  121 F. Supp. 2d 1365· M.D. Fla.· 1999-07-16 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the pollution exclusion clause in the CGL policies is unambiguous under Florida law and excludes coverage for injuries resulting from the ingestion or inhalation of lead paint.
• Travelodge Hotels, Inc. v. Kim Shin Hospitality, Inc.
  27 F. Supp. 2d 1377· M.D. Fla.· 1998-12-02 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the defendant breached the license agreement by failing to make periodic payments and that the liquidated damages provision was enforceable under California law.
• Moore v. Palm Coast Cmty. Serv.
  701 So. 2d 115· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-10-24 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the covenants and restrictions (C&Rs) clearly and unambiguously authorized the developer to assess lot owners for storm water drainage system maintenance as a community benefit.
• de Maria v. Potamkin
  680 So. 2d 1061· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-10-02 ·cited 1×
  De Maria appeals a judgment finding her personally liable on a promissory note signed to guarantee a $200,000 corporate loan. The court affirmed, holding that De Maria failed to overcome the statutory presumption of personal liability under Florida law.
• Gorman v. Kelly
  658 So. 2d 1049· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-06-09 ·cited 1×
  David Gorman sought specific performance and damages for breach of a letter agreement regarding the purchase of his interest in undeveloped property. The trial court found the agreement ambiguous and characterized it as a sales contract (not an option) with a buyer's right to ter
• Bianchi's From Roma, Inc. v. BIG Five Club, Inc.
  630 So. 2d 642· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-01-11 ·cited 1×
  Bianchi's From Roma appealed summary judgment dismissing its breach of contract action against Big Five Club. The court reversed, holding that a release executed simultaneously with a written agreement created a genuine issue of material fact regarding the parties' intent, preclu
• Consarc Corp. v. Marine Midland Bank, N.A.
  996 F.2d 568· 2d Cir.· 1993-06-14 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether a binding contract was formed, either through a series of writings or an oral agreement.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Woodside Constr., Inc.
  979 F.2d 172· 9th Cir.· 1992-11-06 ·cited 1×
  A signature on an instrument that does not clearly indicate it was made in a representative capacity binds the signer individually as an endorser.
• Pathway Fin. v. Miami Int'l Realty Co.
  588 So. 2d 1000· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-09-10 ·cited 1×
  Pathway Financial (formerly Crawford Savings & Loan) appealed a jury verdict awarding plaintiffs over $5.7 million for breach of contract in a time-share financing arrangement for Colorado condominium units. The appellate court affirmed the finding of breach of contract but rever