Skip to main content
· 11/9/1896

Wolf v. Rosenbach

Citations

  • 2 Pa. Super. 587
  • 1896 Pa. Super. LEXIS 90

Syllabus

<p>Evidence — Parol agreement to contradict a promissory note.</p> <p>In all the eases sustaining exceptions to the rule which excludes parol evidence to contradict or vary a written contract, no case goes to the length of ruling that such evidence is admissible to change the promise itself, without proof or even allegation of fraud or mistake.</p> <p>Evidence of an alleged oral agreement that a promissory note was to be renewed at maturity if it proved inconvenient for the maker to pay the same is inadmissible.</p>

Judges: Beaver, Oblady, Orlady, Reeder, Rice, Smith, Wickham, Willard

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.