If you’re not a lawyer, chances are you’ve heard of contracts, but you’ve never heard of the “Parol Evidence Rule.” As a contract attorney Memphis, TN routinely trusts, we have seen many cases in which this legal rule applies, and it has been our experience that most clients are shocked to learn that in some cases, a court or jury will never have the chance to hear “their side of the story” about the case. Here’s how the rule works:
Hypothetical: Alice and Bob have a written contract. Alice sues Bob for breach of contract. The case goes to trial. Any evidence at trial about the negotiations, conversations, or agreements on terms which led up to the final written contract executed by Alice and Bob would be parol evidence.
The rule applies only where there is a written contract: It does not apply to cases involving oral agreements. The rule prohibits any proof at trial of agreements, conversations, or negotiations which happened before or at the same time as the execution of the final written contract. Even though “parol evidence” technically refers to oral testimony, the rule also applies to letters, emails and other writings created before or at the same time as the contract was signed.
The parol evidence rule is a rule of substantive law intended to protect the integrity of written contracts by putting a limit on what people can testify about at trial when the testimony is related to the terms of a written contract. Since courts should not look beyond a written contract when its terms are clear, the parol evidence rule provides that contracting parties cannot use extraneous evidence to change, vary, or qualify the plain meaning of an unambiguous written contract. The policy behind the rule is that it is not a good idea to allow people who have entered into a written contract to present evidence that contradicts what they agreed to in writing. As usual, there are exceptions to the rule, and a contract attorney can advise you on whether any of the exceptions might apply to your case. But you shouldn’t count on it.
A Tennessee court case which examines the parol evidence rule is First Tennessee Bank v. Bad Toys, Inc. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). In that bank loan case, the borrower signed loan papers with the bank. The bank made it clear in all of the papers that, if the borrower defaulted, the bank could sell the assets the borrower put up as collateral in whatever order it wanted to. In addition, the bank made it clear that it had no obligation to sell pledged assets before it tried to collect from the borrower. The loan papers also contained standard language reciting that they contained all of the terms of the parties’ agreements. The borrower, who had pledged stock as collateral, eventually defaulted. The bank filed suit against the borrower. The borrower alleged that, at the time the loans were made, a bank officer had verbally promised to sell the stock before trying to collect from the borrower if the borrower ever defaulted. The borrower alleged that if the bank had sold the pledged stock before the value of the stock fell, the borrower’s obligation to the bank would have been reduced. The court ruled that the parol evidence rule prevented the admission of the testimony of the borrower about the alleged oral agreement made by the bank officer. As you can see, the parol evidence rule can be outcome determinative. Because of the rule, the bank in this case never had to worry about whether the jury would believe the borrower and find for the borrower instead of the bank.
Because of the parol evidence rule, it is extremely important that any written contract you enter into contain all of the understandings and promises between the parties. If you need help putting an agreement into proper contract form so that your rights are protected, call the contract attorney with contract drafting and litigation.
Thanks to our friends and contributors at Patterson Bray who have significant experience in contract formation and litigation.
Fill out the form and we’ll respond as soon as possible.
Posted on Google
AnonymousTrustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google.
I was facing a charge of Reckless Driving for speeding on I66 at midnight. This is considered a Class 1 Misdemeanor in the state of Virginia. Having something like Reckless Driving on your record is on par with having a DUI. This charge also carries a chance for jail time (up to a year). I was incredibly scared because I had never faced such a charge. And looking into Virginia Law, my speed exceeded 90mph, which is quite serious. I retained Dave Albo to help me with this case. Since my record was clean, Dave had advised I do the following before my trial. * Take a DMV Driver's Improvement Course * Take a Behavior Modification Course * Do 100 hours of community service * Print my DMV Record one week before the trial On the day of my trial, Dave got my Reckless Driving charge REDUCED to a regular Speeding charge. This was the absolute best case scenario for me. No criminal record. No jail time. No suspension of license. I did receive 6 demerit points and had to pay a fine of $250 (plus court fees). But that's a slap on the wrist, compared to what I could have been facing. Thank you Dave Albo for helping me through this ordeal!Posted on Google
TomDave albo it's a fantastic lawyer. He has helped me twice now with great results both times with minor traffic tickets. I would recommend him to anybody including my family. He has great ethics and honesty which is what I look for in a lawyer .Posted on Google
kendall carpenterDave was my attorney recently for a car accident where I needed someone to represent me in court. After exchanging all necessary information he reassured me when the court date came that there wouldn’t be anything to worry about. On the day of court a couple problems arose and Dave was able to rectify them quickly, told me everything I need to say if needed and when it was all over he got my violation reduced significantly. I hope to never go to court again but if I do I will being calling Dave again.Posted on Google
Amanda StallardRetaining the services of Mr. Albo for traffic court was probably the best decision I made. He is very responsive to emails, knowledgeable, and punctual. He provided excellent advice that eased the panic of having to go to the court house and stand before a judge. I am very happy with the outcome of my visit to traffic court and highly recommend Dave Albo.Posted on Google
Mark WestMr Albo was very professional and I was pleased with the outcome.Posted on Google
MDavid was incredible to work with from clear communication and next steps. To showing up to traffic court early to walk over all steps, making case in court as experienced/intelligent/well spoken lawyer. Lastly, he even followed after case in writing to confirm the outcome outlining everything that happened in lamen terms (in my case the best outcome we could ask for). I’m so appreciative to David.Posted on Google
mitquinn88Absolutely top notch representation. Can't thank Dave enough for his knowledge and expertise.Posted on Google
G RThanks to Dave Albo for a fantastic job representing me and ensuring the best possible outcome for my case. I highly recommend him - you will be in good hands for sure. From start to finish he provided expert counsel and kept me well informed. He simply could not have done a better job.Posted on Google
Hope CarriganI am THRILLED with the outcome of my case, all thanks to Attorney Albo's superb expertise, excellent advice & sharp negotiating skills! I am extremely relieved and grateful; I highly recommend retaining his services. Well beyond worth it!!Posted on Google
Doug DamronDave did a great job representing me for my traffic court infraction! I wanted the best and his name came up as I searched for an attorney. Highly recommend him on all levels including a successful outcome to my case.
