Tangren Family Trust v. Tangren Ex Rel. Tangren

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that absent fraud, extrinsic evidence may not be used to vary or add to the terms of an integrated contract
• explaining that “parol evidence” is “ ‘evidence of contemporaneous conversations, representations, or statements offered for the purpose of varying or adding to the terms of [the] contract’ ”
• defining an integrated agreement as “a writing ... constituting a final expression of one or more terms of an agreement” and holding that an agreement reduced to writing is “conclusively presumed” to contain “the whole of .the agreement between the parties”
• “[E]xtrinsic evidence is appropriately considered, even in the face of a clear integration clause, where the contract is alleged to be a forgery, a joke, a sham, lacking in consideration, or where a contract is voidable for fraud, duress, mistake, or illegality.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).