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
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
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
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
On January 14, 2013, the California Supreme Court overruled a decision it issued 78 years ago, making it easier for parties to a written contract to offer evidence showing fraud in the making of the contract. The...more
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
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
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