Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- ADR Scholarship (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- Binding (1)
- Common (1)
- Common-law (1)
-
- Constitutional (1)
- Construction (1)
- Consumers (1)
- Contract (1)
- Extrinsic evidence (1)
- Federal (1)
- Grounds (1)
- Hill v. Gateway (1)
- Intent (1)
- Interpretation (1)
- Law (1)
- Litigation (1)
- Meaning (1)
- Outcome (1)
- Parol evidence (1)
- Parties (1)
- Statutory (1)
- Terms (1)
- Unfair (1)
- Uniform Commercial Code (1)
- Written agreements (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
On Parol: The Construction And Interpretation Of Written Agreements And The Role Of Extrinsic Evidence In Contract Litigation, Keith A. Rowley
On Parol: The Construction And Interpretation Of Written Agreements And The Role Of Extrinsic Evidence In Contract Litigation, Keith A. Rowley
Scholarly Works
As a general rule, extrinsic evidence, whether written or oral, is not admissible to prove either the intent of the parties to a contract or the meaning of contractual terms when the parties have executed an unambiguous, fully-integrated (i.e., final and all-inclusive) written agreement. The trial court may consider various types of extrinsic evidence, however, in determining whether a particular agreement is fully integrated or ambiguous, and even in choosing among rival interpretations of an agreement where ambiguity is not present. If the trial court determines that an agreement is not fully integrated, then the trier of fact may consider …
Gateway Widens Doorway To Imposing Unfair Binding Arbitration On Consumers, Jean R. Sternlight
Gateway Widens Doorway To Imposing Unfair Binding Arbitration On Consumers, Jean R. Sternlight
Scholarly Works
Hill v. Gateway, is but the most extreme example of a series of court decisions that allow large companies to impose potentially unfair binding arbitration agreements on unwitting consumers. The outcome in Gateway, however, is questionable on federal statutory, common law, and constitutional grounds.