King v. Bray

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the essence of the parol evidence rule provides that a written document intended to be the final embodiment of parties’ agreement cannot be modified by parol evidence
• “[T]he party seeking to introduce parol evidence must establish that the document is ambiguous and in need of interpretation.”
• where one interpretation of a contract would be absurd and another would be consistent with reason and probability, the contract should be interpreted in a rational manner
• “Florida courts generally agree that failure to object to the introduction of par-ol evidence in the trial proceedings waives the right to invoke the rule on appeal”
• “The courts generally agree that where one interpretation of a contract would be absurd and another would be consistent with reason and probability, the contract should be interpreted in the rational manner.”
• “The courts generally agree that where one interpretation of a contract would be absurd and another would be consistent with reason and probability, the contract should be interpreted in the rational manner.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).