Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Often Imitated, But Not Yet Duplicated, Revised Uniform Commercial Code Article 1, Keith A. Rowley
The Often Imitated, But Not Yet Duplicated, Revised Uniform Commercial Code Article 1, Keith A. Rowley
Scholarly Works
Unlike Revised Uniform Commercial Code Article 9 (1999), which every state and the District of Columbia enacted within roughly two years of its promulgation, states have been slower to warm to Revised UCC Article 1 (2001). Nearly seven years after the American Law Institute and the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Law promulgated it, thirty-three states have enacted their own versions of Revised UCC Article 1. None of the thirty-three has enacted the uniform version in its entirety. All thirty-three enacting states have rejected the uniform choice-of-law provision (§ 1-301) in favor of retaining language based on pre-Revised …
A Brief History Of Anticipatory Repudiation In American Contract Law, Keith A. Rowley
A Brief History Of Anticipatory Repudiation In American Contract Law, Keith A. Rowley
Scholarly Works
This article traces the evolution of the doctrine of anticipatory repudiation from its foundations laid years before the landmark case of Hochster v. De la Tour, 118 Eng. Rep. 922 (Q.B. 1853), through Hochster, its growing acceptance by American courts in the late-1800s and early-1900s, its canonization in the first Restatement of Contracts (despite the Restatement's principal Reporter's personal objections to the doctrine), its codification in the Uniform Commercial Code, its standardization in the Restatement (Second) of Contracts, and its inclusion in the U.N. Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. This article devotes considerable attention not only …
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 …