News & Analysis as of

Change In Parol Evidence Precedent Could Spell Greater Litigation Expense for Businesses

The California Supreme Court’s recent clarification of the fraud exception to the Parol Evidence Rule weakened the effect of contract integration clauses, and may mean lengthier, and more costly, litigation for businesses. ...more

California Courts Confirm: Fraud Actions Can Be Used to Avoid Contractual Obligations

Many people appreciate the importance of contracts. We sign them daily, from our agreement to pay the amount at the bottom of our lunch receipt to that pesky cell phone contract that seems to increase every month. However,...more

Seventh Circuit Permits Parol Evidence to Prove Fraud in the Inducement Despite Lack of Fraud in Integration Clause

In this week's post, we take a look at the recent Seventh Circuit case Judson Atkinson Candies, Inc. v. Kenray Associates, Inc. that held that parol evidence could be used to prove fraud in the inducement of a contract – a...more

Lenders Beware - Oral Statements may Trump Written Agreements

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

Pendergrass: The 78 Year Reign has Ended

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...

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...

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

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

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

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

Reconsidering the Fraud Exception to the Parol Evidence Rule

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

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

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

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

12 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1