CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE: CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
...Writings
......Parol Evidence
.........Cases Excluding
 11 Cards On This Topic:
  • Court erred in admitting parol evidence of P's promise to interpret K to limit scope of D's work under integrated K.
  • W's testimony as to parties' intent when entering into MSA that contradicted plain meaning of writing improper under parol evidence rule.
  • Mere allegation of extrinsic evidence doesn't require overruling demurrer: court considers parol evidence allegations, but unless they support interpretation to which K is reasonably susceptible, it must sustain demurrer.
  • Where allegations on which Ps relied were not offered to vary, alter, or add to the terms of purchase and sale agreement, parol evidence rule was inapplicable and trial court erred in sustaining demurrer for Ds.
  • Parol evidence rule does not apply where extrinsic evidence is being offered not to reconstruct the parties' contractual obligations but to establish a third party's distinct obligations.
  • Evidence of prior indemnity agreement re sale of apartment complex properly excluded under parol evidence rule where integrated K superseded all prior agreements.
  • Extrinsic evidence must be relevant to prove meaning to which writing reasonably susceptible.
  • Oral evidence contrary to express written terms of K inadmissible.
  • Parol evidence rule applies: not only to letter of the written document, but also to its legal effect, to contracts to sell, and to contracts which are partially written and partially oral.
  • Parol evidence inadmissible to contradict written agreement not reasonably susceptible of contrary interpretation.
  • Parol evidence is rule of substantive law; integrated written agreement exclusive and binding, no matter how persuasive evidence of oral agreement.


    •