Parol Evidence

Lenders Beware - Oral Statements may Trump Written Agreements

by Kristy Young | Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on 3/15/2013

The California Supreme Court recently held that a borrower may rely upon oral promises to support a fraud claim against its lender even when such oral promises contradict the written agreement....more

Court of Appeals Finds The Phrase "Other Good And Valuable Consideration" In A Contract To Be A Clear And Unambiguous Statement

by Valentina Shenderovich | Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on 3/8/2013

In Schron v. Troutman Saunders LLP, 2013 NY Slip Op 00952 (N.Y. Feb 24, 2013), the New York Court of Appeals held that the phrase “other good and valuable consideration” within a contract was not ambiguous, and therefore...more

Pendergrass: The 78 Year Reign has Ended

by David Ajalat | Sedgwick LLP on 3/5/2013

After decades of criticism, the California Supreme Court recently overturned Bank of America etc. Assn. v. Pendergrass, 4 Cal.2d 258 (1935) (Pendergrass) which narrowed the fraud exception to the parol evidence rule. ...more

California Supreme Court Expands Fraud Exception to the Parol Evidence Rule, Eliminating Significant Barrier to Claims of...

by Nancy Sher Cohen, Shawn Ledingham, Jr | Proskauer Rose LLP on 3/1/2013

Last month, the California Supreme Court overruled longstanding precedent and restored to full force the fraud exception to California's parol evidence rule. In Riverisland Cold Storage, Inc. v. Fresno-Madera Production...more

Don't Panic - The Fall of Pendergrass and Restoring the Full Fraud Exception to the Parol Evidence Rule May Not Be as Bad as You...

by Michael Walsh | Sedgwick LLP on 2/27/2013

In Riverisland Cold Storage, Inc., v. Fresno-Madera Prod. Credit Ass., S190581, the unanimous California Supreme Court recently overturned the widely criticized Pendergrass rule, thus restoring the full breadth of the fraud...more

California Supreme Court Eases Admissibility of Oral Statements in Contract Fraud Disputes

by Melissa Lor | Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP on 2/22/2013

California, like most jurisdictions, prohibits parties to integrated contracts from introducing “parol evidence” — this is, evidence of prior written or verbal agreements made by a party to a contract — if those alleged...more

Fenwick Employment Brief - February 2013

by Daniel J. McCoy, Saundra Riley | Fenwick & West LLP on 2/21/2013

In This Issue: *FEATURE ARTICLES - Cal Supreme Court Refuses To Immunize Employers In Mixed-Motive Discrimination Cases, But Significantly Limits Remedies - Manager's Bias, Public Policy, And Defamation...more

Promises to Keep—Lender Beware: California Supreme Court Expands Parol Evidence Fraud Exception

by Craig A. Barbarosh, Jennifer Brooks, Karen B. Dine | Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP on 2/21/2013

In 1935, the California Supreme Court in Bank of America National Trust and Savings Ass’n v. Pendergrass prohibited a borrower from introducing external or parol evidence to demonstrate fraud in connection with an agreement...more

Litigation Alert: California Supreme Court Announces Sea-Change in Rules Governing Use of Parol Evidence to Show Fraud in Contract...

by Guinevere Jobson, Michael A. Sands | Fenwick & West LLP on 1/30/2013

Background - On January 14, 2013, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision clarifying – and ultimately rewriting – the applicable legal standard for introduction of parol evidence to show that a contract...more

Infobytes - A Weekly In-depth review of news & developments in the financial services industry - January 25, 2013

by BuckleySandler LLP on 1/29/2013

In This Issue: - FEDERAL ISSUES - STATE ISSUES - COURTS - MISCELLANY - FIRM NEWS - FIRM PUBLICATIONS - MORTGAGES - BANKING - CONSUMER FINANCE - SECURITIES - E-COMMERCE - Excerpt from...more

Disgruntled Borrowers More Likely to Sue Lenders for Fraud as a Result of Recent California Supreme Court Decision

by Hopkins & Carley on 1/29/2013

For the past seventy years, California Courts have held that a party is barred from claiming fraud based on an alleged oral misrepresentation that directly contradicted the express terms of a written agreement. This rule had...more

California Supreme Court Overturns Long-standing Rule Limiting Fraud Exception To Parol Evidence Rule

by BuckleySandler LLP on 1/29/2013

On January 14, the California Supreme Court overturned a long-standing state limitation on the fraud exception to the parol evidence rule. Riverisland Cold Storage, Inc. v. Fresno-Madera Prod. Credit Assoc., No. S190581, 2013...more

Reconsidering the Fraud Exception to the Parol Evidence Rule

by Travis Wall | Barger & Wolen on 1/28/2013

The California Supreme Court has removed a legal barrier for litigants seeking to invalidate contracts on the basis of fraud. Overruling a 75-year old decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the parol evidence rule does...more

The Quest For Contractual Certainty

by Daniel Rapaport | Wendel, Rosen, Black & Dean LLP on 1/24/2013

The California Supreme Court has re-examined and largely restricted the scope of the parol evidence rule (Code of Civil Procedure §1856) in the case of RiverIsland Cold Storage, Inc. v. Fresno-Madera Production Credit...more

California Supreme Court Broadens Borrower Fraud Defense to Written Loan Agreements

by Peter Isola, Harvey Schochet | Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on 1/21/2013

The California Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision earlier this week, broadening the scope of the “fraud exception” to the parol evidence rule, to allow a plaintiff challenging the terms of a written agreement to...more

Think You Are Protected by the Clear Terms of a Written Contract? Think Again!

by Robert Waxman | Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP on 1/17/2013

The California Supreme Court just released a significant new decision dealing with the parol evidence rule that changes the law dramatically in California. The case name/citation is Riverisland Cold Storage, Inc. v....more

California Supreme Court Eliminates Lender Defense to Borrower Fraud Claims

by James Wright | Buchalter Nemer on 1/17/2013

On January 14, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Riverisland Cold Storage v. Fresno-Madera Production Credit Assn., which takes away a lender defense to borrower fraud claims and will therefore have a...more

Parol Evidence Rule Barred Defendants' Interpretation Of Earn-Out Provision

by Mack Sperling | Brooks Pierce on 12/10/2012

Premier, Inc. v. Peterson, 2012 NCBC 59, decided last Friday by Judge Murphy, turned on a strict application of the parol evidence rule. At issue was whether the defendants were entitled to a substantial earn-out payment...more

The Parol Evidence Rule: Forget Blue State/Red State, New Jersey is an Egg State

by James J. Ferrelli, Eric D. Frank | Duane Morris LLP on 12/7/2012

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? This age-old causality dilemma dates back to ancient philosophers, but can also be viewed as a metaphor for the debate over the breadth of the parol evidence rule. Ah, the parol...more

Court Held That Executor Had A Right To Funds In Joint Account

by David Johnson | Winstead PC on 9/24/2012

In The Estate of Brown, the court of appeals affirmed a summary judgment for an executor, holding that the executor had the right to funds in a joint account. No. 04-11-00541-CV, 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 5087 (Tex. App.—San...more

Home

Legal News

Find a Lawyer

Browse Subjects

Subscribe

Pro Services

For Reporters