McKinney v. Knapp

How courts have described this case

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

• “[w]here a subsequent contract unambiguously displays the parties’ intention to supersede or modify terms in a previous contract, the terms of the subsequent contract will control”
• “Parol, or extrinsic, evidence is only admissible if the terms of the contract are ambiguous, and can only be used to interpret, not contradict, the express language of the contract.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).