Parol Evidence Rule

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

• Hiawassee Orlando v. David
  9th Cir. Ct. App. Div.· 2012-01-03
  Hiawassee Orlando, LLC appeals a trial court judgment ordering it to reimburse homeowner David Rosenberg for HOA dues related to subdivision security gates pursuant to a 1993 letter agreement. The appellate court reverses, holding that the 1993 Letter, which purported to bind suc
• Avisena, Inc. v. Santalo
  65 So. 3d 14· Fla. 3d DCA· 2011-05-04
  The Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction, holding that the former employee's termination without cause triggered a one-year non-competition period, not the two-year period Avisena argued for. The court found the employment agreeme
• GE LIN v. Ecclestone Signature Homes OF Palm Beach, LLC
  59 So. 3d 267· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-04-13
  Ge Lin appeals a judgment requiring him to close on a purchase agreement for a pre-construction home with furnishings. The primary issue is whether the contract violates the statute of frauds because Schedule 1, which was supposed to list all furniture items, was not attached. Th
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. RTN Invs., LLC
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2011-02-10
  The Court found in favor of the plaintiff, RTN Investors, LLC, on its breach of contract claims against RETN, LLC and Jovica Petrovic. The Court determined that the Loan Agreement was clear and unambiguous, and that the defendants committed multiple Events of Default, including f
• KFC Nat'l Council & Advertising Coop., Inc. v. C.A. No. 5191-VCS KFC Corp.
  Del. Ch.· 2011-01-31
  The Court held that the NCAC Certificate of Incorporation is ambiguous regarding the respective authorities of KFCC and the NCAC Committee concerning national advertising strategy. Interpreting the Certificate in light of parol evidence and the parties' course of performance, the
• In & for New Castle Cnty. John DOE & Jane DOE
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2010-10-27
  The Court granted the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, finding that the forum selection clause in the agreement was enforceable. The Court held that Jane Doe was bound by the agreement she signed, and that John Doe, as a minor, was also bound by the agreement entered into on his be
• Auto Source v. Demarco
  9th Cir. Ct. App. Div.· 2010-09-14
  The Ninth Judicial Circuit Court reversed a trial court's judgment awarding damages to a buyer in a used car sale dispute, finding the trial record insufficient to support the judgment. The court remanded the case for a new trial due to the absence of findings of fact, conclusion
• Sewell v. D'Alessandro & Woodyard, Inc.
  709 F. Supp. 2d 1251· M.D. Fla.· 2010-04-28
  The court held that the parol evidence rule's inducement exception does not apply when the alleged oral agreement directly contradicts an express provision in the written agreement.
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Cambridge Strategic Mgmt. Grp., Inc. v. IDT Dom. Telecom, Inc.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2010-04-22
  The court denied in part and granted in part the defendant's motion to dismiss. The claims for breach of express contract and equitable estoppel were allowed to proceed, while the claims for breach of implied contract and quantum meruit were dismissed. The court found that while
• Open MRI v. State Farm Fire
  9th Cir. Ct. App. Div.· 2010-04-06
  Open MRI of Orlando, as assignee of an insured's PIP benefits, sued State Farm for refusing to pay for MRI services. The appellate court affirmed summary judgment in favor of State Farm, holding that the assignment of benefits signed by the insured was merely a direction to pay O
• CA, Inc. v. C.A. No. 4300-VCS Ingres Corp.
  Del. Ch.· 2009-12-07
  The court held that Ingres would have been obligated to provide OpenROAD 2006 to CA's legacy customers under the original Divestiture Agreements. However, the subsequent 2007 Reseller Agreement superseded those provisions regarding the terms for obtaining new versions of products
• Haim Turgman v. MM World Ent., LLC
  21 So. 3d 104· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-10-21
  A real estate broker sued a seller for an unpaid commission after a sale failed to close. The trial court granted summary judgment for the broker, but the appellate court reversed, holding that the commission agreement was ambiguous as to whether the broker earned commission upon
• Gulf Power Co. v. Coalsales II, L.L.C.
  661 F. Supp. 2d 1270· N.D. Fla.· 2009-09-30
  The court held that the contract was not a sole source agreement, and therefore, the closure of one mine did not excuse the defendant's obligation to supply coal from other approved sources.
• Concord Steel, Inc.
  Del. Ch.· 2009-09-30
  The court held that the Non-Competition covenant in the Asset Purchase Agreement was breached by Defendants WSP and Neary. The court found the covenant to be unambiguous and applicable to HD plasma cutting work, not just oxyfuel. Consequently, WSP and Neary were found liable for
• In & for Kent Cnty. Velocity Express, Inc.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2009-08-07
  The court granted in part and denied in part Office Depot's motion for summary judgment. The court denied the motion regarding Velocity's claim for amounts owed under the CD&L contract, finding a genuine issue of material fact. The court granted the motion regarding Office Depot'
• Garcia v. Celestron
  2 So. 3d 1061· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-02-04
  Mercy Garcia, personal representative and beneficiary of her father's estate, challenged a trial court order requiring sale of the estate property. The court held that the will's provisions were ambiguous regarding whether Garcia's life estate required her to live in the property
• Alliance Data Sys. Corp. v. C.A. No. 3796-VCS Blackstone Cap. P'rs V L.P.
  Del. Ch.· 2009-01-15
  The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss, finding that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for breach of contract. The Merger Agreement did not obligate Aladdin to force Blackstone to agree to the OCC's demands, nor did Blackstone's refusal to assent constitute an af
• Grandis Fam. P'ship, Ltd. v. Hess Corp.
  588 F. Supp. 2d 1319· S.D. Fla.· 2008-10-31
  The court held that the reference to 'purchase orders' in Schedule C of the contract was too vague to incorporate by reference the Hess Purchase Orders containing an arbitration clause, and APT did not have sufficient knowledge of these terms.
• E.I. DU Pont de Nemours & Co. v. C.A. No. 3741-VCL Bayer Cropscience L.P.
  Del. Ch.· 2008-07-29
  The court denied DuPont's request for a preliminary injunction, finding that DuPont had not demonstrated a reasonable probability of success on the merits of its claim that it could mix isoxadifen with non-sulfonylurea (non-SU) herbicides under the supply agreement. While DuPont
• Luis Villa, Jr., M.D. v. Regalado
  981 So. 2d 659· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-05-21
  The court held that the trial court correctly interpreted the agreement to mean the judgment was to be satisfied only by proceeds from other lawsuits, which yielded no recovery.
• Bibi v. Royal Hidden Cove AT the Polo Club Homeowners Ass'n, Inc.
  974 So. 2d 619· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-02-27
  A settlement agreement that conditions the right to continue a lawsuit on failure of both parties to provide approval by a specified date requires that both parties fail to approve; if only one party fails to approve, the agreement does not permit the continuation of the suit.
• Of the William B. Chandler III Chancellor
  Del. Ch.· 2008-02-07
  The court granted summary judgment for the defendant, finding no enforceable promise to refrain from obstructing the plaintiff's ocean view. The contract's merger doctrine extinguished the purchase agreement upon the deed's delivery, and even if fraud revived the contract, it con
• Lennar Homes, Inc. v. Dorta-Duque
  972 So. 2d 872· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-09-19
  Lennar Homes appealed a trial court judgment granting declaratory relief and specific performance to Dorta-Duque for breach of a settlement agreement. The court held that Lennar's obligations under the settlement were not excused because the contingencies specified in the agreeme
• Pac. Emp'rs Ins. v. Wausau Bus. Ins.
  508 F. Supp. 2d 1167· M.D. Fla.· 2007-06-14
  The court found that the Employee Exclusion Provision in the Wausau Policies is ambiguous because the term 'short-term' is undefined and the facts surrounding Mr. Hart's employment are susceptible to multiple reasonable interpretations, thus precluding summary judgment.
• Sheppard v. Sheppard
  948 So. 2d 61· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-01-12
  In this post-divorce enforcement proceeding, the trial court reformed a settlement agreement's pension provision based solely on the former husband's parol evidence testimony about the parties' intent, without allowing the former wife to present contradictory evidence. The appell
• Modern, Inc. v. Florida
  444 F. Supp. 2d 1234· M.D. Fla.· 2006-08-15
  The court held that the defendant is entitled to summary judgment on the common law flowage easement claim because its actions were aimed at restoring natural water flow, not interfering with it. The court also found that certain deed descriptions were too ambiguous to establish
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Thoughtworks, Inc.
  Del. Ch.· 2006-06-30
  The court held that the corporate charter required the company to immediately redeem its preferred stock using any legally available funds, with the working capital set-aside limited to the fiscal year of the redemption date. The court also concluded that the charter obligated th
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. I.U. N. Am., Inc. v. A.I.U. Ins. Co.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2006-05-02
  The court held that CGU Insurance Company is not obligated to pay amounts that Pfizer/Quigley became liable for due to defaulting members of the Center for Claims Resolution (CCR), as the Settlement Agreement, incorporating the Wellington Agreement by reference, expressly relieve
• In & for Sussex Cnty. N & P P'rs, LLC
  Del. Ch.· 2006-02-22
  The court held that the plaintiff, N & P Partners LLC, did not have the right to unilaterally expand the Bayberry Woods Condominium after August 29, 1991, without the consent of the Council of Unit Owners. The court further determined that the value of the consent required from t
• Madsen v. Palm Beach Polo Holdings, Inc.
  899 So. 2d 435· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-04-06
  Madsen, an accounting firm, sued Palm Beach Polo for unpaid consulting and expert witness services. The trial court admitted parol evidence of an oral fee cap despite a written contract providing for standard hourly rates, and the appellate court reversed, holding that parol evid
• Haroldo J. Montealegre v. Banco de Credito Centro-Americano, S.A.
  895 So. 2d 1097· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-12-22
  The court held that a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding the interpretation of a contract, precluding summary judgment.
• Black v. Orange Cnty.
  888 So. 2d 156· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-12-03
  The appellate court reversed summary judgment because the plat language was ambiguous regarding whether the 60-foot strip was dedicated to the public or merely reserved for future acquisition by the county, creating a genuine dispute of material fact inappropriate for summary res
• Powers v. Aberdeen Golf & Country Club, Inc.
  886 So. 2d 312· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-11-10
  The court held that the contract language was ambiguous regarding the assumption of liability and that the statute of limitations defense was waived by failing to assert it in the initial responsive pleading.
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. ALL PRO Maids, Inc. v. Civil Action No. 058-N Susan Layton
  Del. Ch.· 2004-08-09
  The Court held that the employment agreement containing a covenant not to compete was valid and enforceable. The employee breached the agreement by forming a competing company and soliciting former clients. The employee and the new company were found liable for tortious interfere
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Concord Mall, LLC v. Best BUY Stores, L.P.
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2004-07-12
  The court held that the tenant was not obligated to reimburse the landlord for Delaware Gross Receipts Tax because the tax was not a substitute for a property tax, and the lease did not explicitly require such reimbursement. However, the court found the tenant liable for their pr
• Aliza Barzilay v. Carlton Palms Educ. Ctr., Inc.
  875 So. 2d 1280· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-07-02
  The court affirmed dismissal of the complaint under the parol evidence rule, holding that oral representations cannot contradict an unambiguous written contract between the parties.
• Kraft v. Mass. Cas. Ins.
  320 F. Supp. 2d 1234· N.D. Fla.· 2004-05-10
  The court held that a "specialty letter" sent by the insurer, which defined the insured's regular occupation as an invasive and interventional cardiologist, constituted a bargained-for modification of the insurance policy, entitling the insured to total disability benefits.
• Excess Risk Underwriters, Inc. v. Lafayette Life Ins.
  328 F. Supp. 2d 1319· S.D. Fla.· 2004-05-03
  Excess Risk Underwriters, Inc. (ERU), an insurance administrator, sued Lafayette Life Insurance Company (LLIC), an insurance carrier, over disputes arising from their contractual relationships regarding administration of insurance policies. The court granted LLIC's motion for sum
• Spectrum Mktg., Inc. v. Altec Lansing Techs., Inc.
  873 So. 2d 383· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-04-07
  The court held that conflicting affidavits regarding the intent behind an ambiguous contract term create a genuine issue of material fact, precluding summary judgment.
• Singer v. W. Publ'g Corp.
  310 F. Supp. 2d 1246· S.D. Fla.· 2004-03-16
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to prove a breach of contract because they did not establish that the defendant failed to publish the databases within a reasonable time, and they failed to prove their damages with reasonable certainty due to their own failure to mitigat
• Hutchinson Island Realty, Inc. v. Babcock Ventures, Inc.
  867 So. 2d 528· Fla. 5th DCA· 2004-02-27
  Hutchinson Island Realty appeals a quiet title judgment in favor of Babcock Ventures, who acquired property through a tax deed sale. The court affirms the tax deed despite Hutchinson's claims that defective notice (due to misspellings of the company and mortgagee names) and an in
• First Coast Cmty. Bank v. Cheshire Contractors OF Nassau, Inc.
  863 So. 2d 362· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-11-21
  The court held that the amount declared for intangible tax purposes does not limit the principal amount secured by a mortgage in a foreclosure action.
• IN & FOR NEW Castle Cnty. Interim Healthcare, Inc
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2003-11-21
  The court denied plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment, finding that numerous genuine issues of material fact remained unresolved regarding each of the breach of warranty claims. These factual disputes, concerning issues such as proper notice, the merits of the underlyi
• Sec'y OF Veterans Affairs v. Roma Food Enters. OF Fla., Inc.
  840 So. 2d 1066· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-01-31
  The Secretary of Veterans Affairs acquired real property through mortgage foreclosure without notice of a prior recorded instrument from Roma Food Enterprises. Roma subsequently attempted to foreclose on the property based on that instrument. The court reversed, holding that the
• Starlite Diners, Inc. v. Oswalt
  823 So. 2d 312· Fla. 5th DCA· 2002-08-16
  Starlite Diners sought to collect sales tax from a buyer under a contract provision explicitly assigning tax responsibility to the buyer. The trial court found the contract ambiguous based on handwritten reference to "sales tax" in a separate provision, accepted the buyer's oral
• Raimi v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg.
  798 So. 2d 913· Fla. 1st DCA· 2001-11-13
  Manuel Raimi appealed the Department of Business and Professional Regulation's decision to lift the stay on his contractor's license suspension after he made a lump sum prepayment instead of continuing monthly restitution payments. The court held that the settlement agreement was
• Goney v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.
  144 F. Supp. 2d 1286· M.D. Fla.· 2001-01-10
  The court held that the plaintiff's motion to strike the defendant's counterclaims should be denied because the release agreement was ambiguous regarding the assignment clause, and counterclaims for reformation and restitution were permissible even after the Mazzoni Farms decisio
• USA Cable
  Del.· 2000-09-18
  The Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Chancery, holding that the holder of a right of first refusal failed to effectively exercise its right. The Court found that while the holder was not required to match extraneous terms in a third-party offer, it was obligated to mat
• CO & CO Enters., Inc. v. Robertson
  761 So. 2d 1179· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-06-28
  CO & CO Enterprises appealed the dismissal of its complaint against Robertson and others regarding a lease/sublease dispute and claims of conversion and trespass to chattels. The court affirmed the dismissal of the lease/sublease breach claim but reversed the dismissal of the con
• Allen v. Ophelia Berry
  765 So. 2d 121· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-06-16
  An enforceable contract for the sale of land requires a written memorandum satisfying the statute of frauds that demonstrates a meeting of the minds on all essential terms, and when the evidence shows the parties were continuing to negotiate essential terms, no enforceable contra