Parol Evidence Rule

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

• EYE Assocs., P.C. v. Incomrx Sys. Ltd. P'ship
  912 F.2d 23· 2d Cir.· 1990-08-15
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether the seller provided a business opportunity under the Act, precluding summary judgment.
• Grubb & Ellis Co. v. Bradley Real Est. Tr.
  909 F.2d 1050· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-09
  The court held that the agency agreement unambiguously entitled the broker to a commission on a sale that occurred during the agency term, regardless of whether the broker procured the sale.
• Sorrels Steel Co., Inc. v. Great Sw. Corp.
  906 F.2d 158· 5th Cir.· 1990-07-19
  The court held that parol evidence was admissible to show GSW's oral promise to remedy future issues, allowing recovery for post-Addendum impact damages, but not pre-Addendum impact damages. The court also affirmed the jury's findings on testing damages and releases, but remanded
• Lillibridge v. Mesa Petroleum Co.
  907 F.2d 1031· 10th Cir.· 1990-07-11
  The court held that the 1982 oil and gas leases were new leases, not extensions or renewals of the 1972 lease, and therefore the appellants' overriding royalty interest expired with the termination of the original lease.
• L.W. Laird v. Integrated Res., Inc.
  897 F.2d 826· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-06
  The court, in a special concurrence, agreed with the majority's result to reverse summary judgment but disagreed with the broad fiduciary duty standard announced by the majority for investment advisors under § 10(b).
• A.E. Alie & Sons, Inc. v. United States Postal Serv.
  897 F.2d 591· 1st Cir.· 1990-03-01
  The court held that a postal clerk's oral assurance could not override the written limitations on postal insurance stated on the registered receipt and USPS regulations, and that reliance on such an assurance was unreasonable.
• Paper Corp. OF Am. v. Sandow
  558 So. 2d 75· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-02-20
  Paper Corporation of America appealed a judgment in a suit to recover on an individual guarantee of a corporate credit account. The court reversed the trial court's limitation of the guarantor's liability to $1,500 and held that Helen Sandow was liable for the entire debt of $41,
• Emil B. Bair v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  895 F.2d 1094· 6th Cir.· 1990-02-08
  The court held that there is no right to a jury trial in ERISA section 502 actions seeking benefits, and that the retirement acceptance form did not constitute an enforceable contract.
• Shoney's, Inc. v. Schoenbaum
  894 F.2d 92· 4th Cir.· 1990-01-16
  The court held that the contract language and existence of separate service marks demonstrate the parties intended to grant rights only for restaurant operations, not motel operations.
• Solomon v. Betras Plastics, Inc.
  550 So. 2d 1182· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-11-02
• Jeff D. v. Andrus
  888 F.2d 617· 9th Cir.· 1989-10-23
  The court held that the district court erred in its interpretation of the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement by excluding certain juveniles from the class definition.
• Wedgewood Realty, Inc. v. Dinardo
  M.D. Fla.· 1989-09-18
• City OF Jacksonville v. W.R. Fairchild Constr. Co., Ltd.
  547 So. 2d 1010· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-08-15
  The City of Jacksonville appealed a trial court judgment awarding damages to construction contractors for steel sheeting work, arguing the contract was unambiguous. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the contract clearly required the cost of driving and pul
• L.R. Bretz v. Portland Gen. Elec. Co.
  882 F.2d 411· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-14
  The court should have considered extrinsic evidence regarding the validity of the contract and the estoppel claim, as genuine issues of fact exist.
• Pac. Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Wise
  878 F.2d 1398· 11th Cir.· 1989-08-04
  The court held that the grant of summary judgment for Pacific Mutual was proper, but the denial of attorney's fees was erroneous. The court reversed the denial of attorney's fees and remanded for an award calculated under O.C.G.A. § 13-1-11.
• Art Knight v. Interco Incorporation
  873 F.2d 1125· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-02
  The court held that the parol evidence rule barred testimony of oral promises regarding the sale of the business, and that the jury instructions on damages were appropriate, limiting recovery to lost commissions during the notice period.
• Forest Hills Utils., Inc. v. Pasco Cnty.
  536 So. 2d 1117· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-12-21
  Forest Hills Utilities disputes a water supply agreement with Pasco County regarding rates. The trial court granted summary judgment for Pasco County on liability, but the appellate court reversed, finding a latent ambiguity in the rate-setting provision that requires extrinsic e
• Elec. M & R, Inc. v. Banco Popular de Puerto RICO
  863 F.2d 1055· 1st Cir.· 1988-12-20
  The court held that even if excluded evidence were admitted, the plaintiff could not establish as a matter of law that damages flowed from the defendant's breach.
• Stutzke v. D.G.C. Liquidation Co.
  533 So. 2d 897· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-11-09
  Michael Stutzke, a gift fruit shop owner, entered into an exclusive agreement with Deerfield Groves Company to sell their grapefruit. When the company's assets were sold in 1985 to new owners who granted exclusive rights to other distributors, Stutzke sued for breach of contract
• Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock Corp. v. Nance
  858 F.2d 182· 4th Cir.· 1988-09-27
  The court held that an employer's erroneous belief that an employee agreed to resign, leading to termination, does not constitute discrimination under the LHWCA if the employer genuinely believed it had a contractual right to terminate.
• Sea-Land Serv., Inc. v. CAP Int'l Trading Corp.
  532 So. 2d 34· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-09-20
  A shipper sued an ocean carrier for breach of a guaranteed arrival date for pickled pig tails destined for Jamaica, claiming the late arrival caused it to miss a tariff deadline and suffer damages. The court reversed the jury verdict, holding that parol evidence of the guaranteed
• Tropicana Prods., Inc. v. Hoke H. Shirley, Jr.
  530 So. 2d 493· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-09-02
  Tropicana breached its contract to purchase fruit from the appellees, and the appellees' sale of their citrus grove to a third party did not constitute a breach because the contract constructively severed the fruit from the land before the sale.
• Arvida Realty Sales, Inc. v. William R. Tinnerman & Co., Inc.
  536 So. 2d 1041· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-07-06
  Arvida Realty Sales, Inc., the exclusive listing broker for a condominium complex, appealed a judgment awarding real estate commissions to cooperating brokers Tinnerman and Steffen despite their clients' failure to close on purchases. The court reversed, holding that the plain la
• City OF Oxnard v. The United States
  851 F.2d 344· Fed. Cir.· 1988-07-06
  The court held that the written contracts, along with consistent correspondence, unambiguously limited the Navy's liability to the 'not to exceed' amounts, and Oxnard failed to establish estoppel or a basis for reformation.
• Adkins v. Woodfin
  525 So. 2d 447· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-04-27
  The court held that the language in the will did not unambiguously refer to a separate writing as required by statute, and therefore, parol evidence was improperly admitted.
• Mussett v. Baker Material Handling Corp.
  844 F.2d 760· 10th Cir.· 1988-04-19
  The court held that an unambiguous release, which explicitly discharged "all other persons, firms, and corporations" from liability, was effective to release an unnamed tortfeasor under Oklahoma law, even after the adoption of the Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act.
• Camyna, Inc. v. Hillestad Enters., Inc.
  521 So. 2d 323· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-03-09
  Defendants appealed a judgment on a promissory note, arguing that a security agreement should have been admitted via parol evidence to modify their liability. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that because the existence of the security agreement was not prove
• Jack Rowe Assoc., Inc. v. Fisher Corp.
  833 F.2d 177· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-27
  The court held that the trial court erred in applying the parol evidence rule too strictly, as the language of the termination clauses was reasonably susceptible to an interpretation requiring good cause, given the surrounding circumstances and oral assurances.
• Forrest Creek Assocs., Ltd. v. McLEAN Sav. & Loan Ass'n
  831 F.2d 1238· 4th Cir.· 1987-10-28
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of all claims and counterclaims, finding that the plaintiffs failed to meet contractual conditions and prove fraud, and that the defendants did not abuse their discretion regarding sanctions or costs.
• Beverly Enters., Inc. v. Fredonia Haven, Inc.
  825 F.2d 374· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-25
  The court held that Beverly's part performance of the oral lease agreement, evidenced by increased rent and assumption of costs, removed the agreement from the Statute of Frauds, making it binding despite not being signed by Fredonia.
• T.S.I., Inc. v. Metric Constructors, Inc.
  817 F.2d 94· 11th Cir.· 1987-05-14
  A joint check provision in a subcontract, absent explicit language to the contrary, does not obligate the general contractor to pay the subcontractor's supplier for materials, but merely provides a mechanism for payment if the contractor chooses to pay.
• Meisler v. Smith
  814 F.2d 1075· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-21
  A 'free look' provision in a real estate purchase contract creates an inference that the purchaser is not ready, willing, and able to buy, which, if unrebutted by substantial evidence, justifies denying the broker's commission.
• In re Murphy v. Wadash Ltd. P'ship
  810 F.2d 454· 4th Cir.· 1987-02-05
  The court held that parol evidence is admissible to show that a purported contract never came into existence.
• Young v. Thousand
  501 So. 2d 44· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-12-31
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying foreclosure because the appellees' defenses of fraud and misrepresentation were unsupported by evidence.
• Moffatt Enters., Inc. v. Borden Inc.
  807 F.2d 1169· 3d Cir.· 1986-12-22
  The court held that the releases in the distributorship agreements did not shield Borden from liability for fraudulent misrepresentations that induced the plaintiffs to enter the contracts, and that the individual plaintiffs had standing to pursue their claims.
• Carlson v. Tandy Computer Leasing
  803 F.2d 391· 8th Cir.· 1986-10-10
  The court held that the agreement was a lease, not a security interest, and that Missouri law governed the substantive issues due to the rights of third-party creditors.
• W.M. Phillips v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.
  792 F.2d 521· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-23
  A franchisor does not breach its fiduciary duty to a franchisee by ceasing discounts when the contract permits such action and there is no evidence of bad faith or fraudulent inducement.
• Int'l Cmty. Corp. v. Orange Ent. Ctr., Inc.
  490 So. 2d 169· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-06-19
  International Community Corporation appeals a trial court judgment denying its claim for reimbursement of a $200,000 real estate broker's commission advanced at closing. The court reverses, holding that the contract and amendment required Orange Entertainment Center to reimburse
• United States v. Mark Twain Bank-Kansas City
  791 F.2d 654· 8th Cir.· 1986-05-23
  The court held that the consulting contract did not constitute an irrevocable commitment, meaning Select did not give value for the cashier's check and was not a holder in due course.
• Devin Tool & Supply Co., Inc. v. Cameron Iron Works, Inc.
  784 F.2d 623· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-10
  The court held that while contract terms excused certain delays, they did not grant unqualified immunity for untimely delivery, and a factual determination of good faith in rescheduling was required. The court affirmed the denial of Cameron's counterclaim due to lack of evidence.
• Lance J. Marchiafava, Inc. v. Haft
  777 F.2d 942· 4th Cir.· 1985-11-27
  The court held that the doctrine of part performance is not available in Virginia in an action at law for damages for breach of an oral contract to take it out of the statute of frauds.
• The Peoples Nat'l Bank v. Bryant
  774 F.2d 682· 5th Cir.· 1985-10-21
  The court held that the trial court correctly applied the parol evidence rule under Texas law to reverse the jury's verdict in favor of the defendants.
• United States v. Sentry Ins.
  774 F.2d 80· 4th Cir.· 1985-10-03
  The court held that Seaboard was entitled to the misapplication of funds defense, but Sentry's knowledge of the payment scheme created a factual dispute precluding summary judgment. The court also affirmed summary judgment for the sureties regarding funds West Chester allowed Cof
• Smedley v. City OF Waldron
  774 F.2d 299· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-02
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding that the City of Waldron's oil and gas lease violated the parties' agreement, thus requiring forfeiture of the reservoir.
• Crown Mgmt. Corp. v. Goodman
  474 So. 2d 1209· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-08-02
  The court held that there was competent and substantial evidence to support the trial judge's determination that the second sentence of paragraph 5 controls the rent escalation.
• Brigitte Schlange-Schoeningen v. Parrish
  767 F.2d 788· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-02
  A merger clause in a real estate contract does not bar an action for fraud when the fraud involved actively creating a false record to deceive a party, rather than merely making a false promise.
• United States v. LaROSA
  765 F.2d 693· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-20
  The court held that parol evidence was admissible to reform a deed when the written description conflicted with physical boundary markers, and the purchasers were not bona fide purchasers due to constructive notice.
• Brown v. G.B.B. Invs., Inc.
  468 So. 2d 365· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-04-16
  The court reversed summary judgment for the defendants because they failed to conclusively establish that the plaintiffs did not rely on the defendants' alleged misrepresentation that properties were "up to grade," leaving a genuine issue of material fact for trial.
• KMS v. Brittany-Melbourne I
  466 So. 2d 1· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-03-07
  KMS of Florida Corporation appealed a trial court decision regarding an electrical contract dispute with Brittany-Melbourne I, Limited. The appellate court reversed, holding that the contract unambiguously required transformers in vaults rather than on pads, and that service of t
• Wilmot H. Simonson Co., Inc. v. Green Textiles Assocs., Inc.
  755 F.2d 217· 1st Cir.· 1985-02-27
  The court held that Richard Green was not an "affiliated person" under the ten-year non-compete clause of the sale agreement because his separate three-year non-compete clause in his employment agreement, part of the same transaction, governed his competitive activities.