Parol Evidence

News & Analysis as of

How to Aggressively Defend Against Lender Liability Lawsuits

Introduction - Following an economic downturn, lenders are inundated with lender liability suits typically based on purported promises to extend the maturity dates of loans, alter the terms of loan agreements, or to...more

Peeking Around Four Corners: Wisconsin Insurers Have Found a Way to Use Extrinsic Evidence to Excuse the Defense of Pending Claims

It is a truism that a liability insurer’s duty to defend is extremely broad—especially in states that apply the “four corners rule.” Under that rule, the insurer has a duty to defend whenever the underlying complaint alleges...more

Eleventh Circuit Recognizes Important Exception to the Eight Corners Rule

Florida courts generally adhere to the Eight Corners Rule when determining whether an insurer has a duty to defend its insured. Under this rule, the duty to defend determination is made by looking only at the terms within...more

“Don’t tell me not to worry, and please don’t call me partner.”

How many websites and marketing materials have you seen that identify a company’s suppliers and other vendors as “partners”? Does this mean that the company actually intends to communicate that it has formed a legal...more

Appellate Court Notes - Week of December 16

AC34780 - Loiselle v. Browning & Browning Real Estate, LLC - Prospective purchaser sued the listing realtor when GMAC rejected their 94k bid subject to inspections for a piece of REO property in favor of a 90k,...more

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

A Guide to Contract Interpretation - October 2013

In This Guide: - Introduction - Contract-Interpretation Flow Chart - Contract-Interpretation Principles And Case-Law Supplement - Excerpt From: Introduction: Transactional attorneys and...more

Get It in Writing … Please!

What do a church, comedy club and bingo parlor have in common? It turns out, construction. To be more specific, a lot of electrical work. It starts with the recent decision of the South Carolina Court of Appeals in Boykin...more

Cherry Picking Contract Provisions in Bankruptcy: Not so Taboo After All?

One of the quintessential principles of the Bankruptcy Code is that when a debtor assumes an executory contract, it must assume the contract as a whole – a debtor cannot cherry pick the contract provisions it wants to assume...more

Liabilities Arising From Contract Negotiations

Yesterday evening, I had the pleasure of moderating a panel comprised of two distinguished in-house counsel, Zachary Zahrek and Teigue Thomas, discussing liabilities and litigation risks that arise from contractual...more

The GPMemorandum, Issue 169

In This Issue: - Ninth Circuit Once Again Affirms $16 Million Verdict In Favor Of Licensee: The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has amended a recent opinion and voted to deny rehearing en...more

The High Price of Imprecision: An Examination of the Enforcement of Letters of Intent Under California Law

Letters of intent and other similar pre-contractual documents, such as term sheets or memorandums of understanding, are used extensively in California real estate transactions as a means for negotiating parties to demonstrate...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

Court Holds Parol Evidence Admissible

As generally understood, the parol evidence rule prohibits the introduction of extrinsic evidence to alter, vary or add to the terms of an integrated agreement. ”Parol” is derived from the French word, “parole” meaning...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

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

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

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

Fenwick Employment Brief - February 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

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...

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

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

35 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2