 | Florida. Supreme Court - 1887 - 562 sider
...ordinary meaning. Story on Contracts, second edition § 639 2 Evan's Pothier on Obligations, 37. The rule that "parol contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible...or vary the terms of a valid written instrument," is said to admit of an exception when, in equity, a party seeks a specific performance of an agreement,... | |
 | Georgia. Supreme Court - 1884 - 922 sider
...motion the court overruled, and plaintiffs excepted. We recognize the rule contended for that ordinarily parol contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible to...contradict or vary the terms of a valid written instrument when the contract is plain and unambiguous upon its face. But that is not the question alone made by... | |
 | Louisiana. Supreme Court - 1849 - 814 sider
...before or at the time of making said acts. It is substantially the same as that of the common law, that parol, contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible...contradict or vary the terms of a valid written instrument ; and the same interpretation appears to have been given to both by the civil and common law courte.... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - 1886 - 744 sider
...in the light of the circumstances under which they are made, and this is no infringement of the rule that parol contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible to contradict or vary the terms of a written instrument. Showing the circumstances under which the contract is made, and the subject-matter... | |
 | Florida. Supreme Court - 1861 - 596 sider
...conversation previous to the signing or execution of said bill of sale. The rule of law briefly expressed is, that "parol contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible...or vary the terms of a valid written instrument." All oral testimony of a previous colloquium between the parties, or of conversation of declarations... | |
 | Oregon. Supreme Court, William Wallace Thayer, Joseph Gardner Wilson, Thomas Benton Odeneal, Julius Augustus Stratton, William Henry Holmes, Reuben S. Strahan, George Henry Burnett, Robert Graves Morrow, James W. Crawford, Frank A. Turner, Bellinger, Charles Byron - 1862 - 466 sider
...Error, v. WILLIAM HODGES, Defendant in Error. Error to Jackson. \. Parol contemporaneous testimony is inadmissible to contradict or vary the terms of a valid written instrument. 2. This court must be guided by what appears on the face of the record. 8. A consideration being good... | |
 | Nathan Howard (Jr.) - 1866 - 656 sider
...the verbal agreement relating to that subject ought therefore to have been admitted. The general rule that " parol contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible...contradict or vary the terms of a valid written instrument " does not apply in cases where the original contract was verbal and entire, and a part only of it... | |
 | Simon Greenleaf - 1866 - 756 sider
...possibly, of one of the parties, is rejected.2 In other words, as the rule is now more briefly expressed, " parol contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible, to contradict or vary the terms of a valid written instrument."8 i Dig. lib. 20, tit. 1,1. 4; Id. lib. 22, Civil Law, — Contra scriptum testiraonitit... | |
 | Francis Hilliard - 1867 - 664 sider
...to conveyancet. 8. Loss of writings. 6. In case of ttase. 15. As to application of writings. § 1. "PAROL contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible to contradict or vary the terms of a valid written instrument;"1 though it may be read by the light of surrounding circumstances, to understand the intent... | |
 | Theophilus Parsons - 1868 - 702 sider
...seq.), upon whose work Duer so strongly relies in his elaborate discussion, lays down the rule thus : " Parol contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible to...contradict or vary the terms of a valid written instrument" His* subsequent remarks indicate the precise limits within which this rule is to be applied. " It is... | |
| |
In other words, as the rule is now more briefly expressed, "parol contemporaneous evidence is inadmissible to contradict or vary the terms of a valid written instrument. 
