This decision holds that Riverisland Cold Storage, Inc. v. Fresno-Madera Production Credit Assn. (2013) 55 Cal.4th 1169 abolishes any parol evidence rule bar to 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.  Here, plaintiff convinced the jury that the defendant made oral promises regarding a closely held corporation’s treasury stock that contradicted several written shareholder agreements.  Testimony about the oral promises was admissible even though the plaintiff did not seek to rescind the shareholder agreements.

California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3 (Moore, J.); March 27, 2018 (published April 23, 2018); 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 361