 | Edward Erastus Deacon, Edward Chitty, Great Britain. Court of Review - 1834 - 800 sivua
...for the intended voyage, and retaining 1000/. arising from the proceeds of the sale. It is admitted, that parol evidence is not admissible to vary the terms of a written agreement; but it has been decided, that such evidence may be admitted to raise an equity; Davis v.... | |
 | Charles L. Clarke, New York (State). Court of Chancery - 1841 - 640 sivua
...identify the mortgage that the opposite party cannot reasonably be misled. Sears vs. Barnum, 139 2. Though parol evidence is not admissible to vary the terms of a written instrument, hut such evidence is admissible to show facts, dchors the instrument, though it should vary the legal... | |
 | William H. R. Wood - 1857 - 834 sivua
...of paper to warrant secondary proof of its contents. Folsom's Executors v. Scott, Oct. T. 1*56. IVi. ! contract so as to make it embrace property not (Jr-teribed therein. Osborn r. Hemlrii-kson, Jan. T.... | |
 | California - 1860 - 388 sivua
...also been prepared to introduce a certified copy of the judgment. Aim* v. Jofas«m, 7 Cal. 110. 9. Parol evidence is not admissible to vary the terms of a written contract, so as to make it embrace property not described therein. Oskorn v. Hendricfaon, ib. 282.... | |
 | California - 1872 - 728 sivua
...this Title. NOTE. — Hawley vs. Brumagim, 33 Cal., p. 394; Wescott vs. Thompson, 18 N* Y., p. 367. Parol evidence is not admissible to vary the terms of a written contract. — Lennard vs. Vischer, 2 Cal., p. 37; Osborne vs. Hendrickson, 7 Cal., p. 282. The written... | |
 | Simon Greenleaf - 1876 - 762 sivua
...admissible in evidence.3 § 284. May be shown to be void. It is in the next place to be noted, that the rule is not infringed by the admission of parol evidence,...showing that the instrument is altogether void, or that 1 Sweet v. Lee, 3 Maa. A Gv. 452 Mumford v. Gothing, 7 CBN s. 805; [Webster v. Hodgkins, 5 Foster,... | |
 | 1912 - 1262 sivua
...the language of the release, but also by the character of the negotiations, preserving, of course, the rule that parol evidence Is not admissible to vary the terms of a written contract. The Instrument above set out does not purport to be a contract, but only a receipt, and.... | |
 | Melville Madison Bigelow - 1880 - 748 sivua
...supra, is not noticed in either place. And Mr. Justice Story, in support of his position, refers to the rule that parol evidence is not admissible to vary the terms of a written contract ; a rule which Chief Justice Marshall thought was not infringed by the decision which he pronounced.... | |
 | Nevada. Supreme Court - 1880 - 512 sivua
...with the contract except as a bondsman: Held, that this evidence was properly admitted. IDEM.—The rule that parol evidence is not admissible to vary the terms of a written contract, is confined in its operation to the parties to the contract, their representatives, and those... | |
 | Austin Abbott - 1881 - 552 sivua
...shall not be received to contradict, or vary the terms, of a valid written instrument. But the rule is not infringed by the admission of parol evidence...the instrument is altogether void, or that it never had any legal existence or binding force, either by reason of fraud, or for want of consideration,... | |
| |
This may seem to be an exception to the rule that parol evidence is not admissible to vary the terms of a written contract, but it is not so held. 
