Reversing a summary judgment for defendant in this breach of contract suit, the Court of Appeal found the parties' brief signed napkin agreement to be enforceable despite some ambiguities and terms left for later determination. It was not too indefinite to enforce or too indefinite to indicate agreement on essential terms. Parol evidence was properly admitted to construe the ambiguous… Read More
After the Court of Appeal decided in Hollingsworth v. Superior Court (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 927 that the trial court, having first acquired jurisdiction, should decide whether the Workers Compensation Appeals Board had exclusive jurisdiction over this worker's injury suit--a question that turned on whether the employer had workers compensation insurance coverage at the time plaintiff was injured. The plaintiff had… Read More
The parol evidence rule does not bar admission of oral promises contradicting a writing if offered to prove fraud—even if the party offering the parol evidence does not seek to rescind or otherwise overturn the written agreement. Read More
Neither the statute of frauds nor the parol evidence rule precluded a real estate broker’s suit for her commission, as she could rely on extrinsic evidence to show that the one owner who signed her listing agreement did so as agent for the other owners. Read More
