Eubanks Bros. v. Texaco Refining & Marketing Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting cause of action based on regulatory estoppel because of the parol evidence rule
• “The parol evidence rule bars consideration of extrinsic evidence to contradict an otherwise unambiguous insurance provision.”
• “The word ‘reimburse’ means ‘repay’ or ‘pay back or compensate (a person) for money spent or for losses or damages incurred.’”
• “New York’s parol evidence rule counsels against adoption of a regulatory estoppel cause of action. The parol evidence rule bars consideration of extrinsic evidence to contradict an otherwise unambiguous insurance provision.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).