University National Bank v. Wolfe

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that parties may modify their original agreement orally “notwithstanding a written agreement that any change to a contract must be in writing”
• stating that there is a “well settled rule that the parties [to a contract] by their conduct may waive the requirements of [the] written contract”
• noting that “whether subsequent conduct of the parties amounts to a modification or waiver of their contract is generally a question of fact to be decided by the trier of fact”
• noting that “whether subsequent conduct of the parties amounts to a modification or waiver of their contract is generally a question of fact to be decided by the trier of fact”
• reversing trial court’s ruling, as a matter of law, that party was negligent, and remanding for factual finding regarding waiver
• parties can “substitute a new oral contract by conduct and intimation, as well as by express words”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).