State v. Newsom

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the rule renders inadmissible evidence used to “modify, supplement, or interpret the terms of an integrated agreement.”
• holding that extrinsic evidence is permissible to interpret an ambiguous contract
• holding that extrinsic evidence is permissible to interpret an ambiguous contract
• holding that extrinsic evidence is permissible to interpret an ambiguous contract
• holding that extrinsic evidence is permissible to interpret an ambiguous contract
• holding that extrinsic evidence is permissible to interpret an ambiguous contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).