Misrepresentation and Fraud
Applicable Laws
The Agreement’s merger clause precludes any precontractual representations of fraud or misrepresentation if the Agreement’s merger clause unambiguously states that it was the party’s intention that the agreement supersedes all precontractual agreements and representations, both oral and written. First Data POS v. Willis Group (2001)
Any agreement that is not to be performed within one year from the making thereof, must be in writing and signed by the parties. Civil Code 1350
One cannot sue for fraud based upon the alleged breach of an oral contract which would itself be unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. Hieke v. George (1999)
Where a representation is controverted by the express terms of the contract, a plaintiff will be unable, as a matter of law, to establish that his reliance is justifiable. Callaway v. DeMain Swine Breeders (1998)
However, if the merger clause is included in the contract for sale of goods, under UCC, the parol evidence of the alleged misrepresentation is admissible, and validity of the contract is to be determined by the jury.
Dana v. Piedmont Motors (1974)
Synthesized Rule #1 …show more content…
In addition, when a representation is controverted by the express terms of the contract, a plaintiff will be unable, as a matter of law, to establish that his reliance is justifiable. However, if the merger clause is included in the contact for a sale of goods, under Uniform Commercial Code, the parol evidence of alleged misrepresentation is admissible, and validity of the contract is to be determined by the
Applicable Laws
The Agreement’s merger clause precludes any precontractual representations of fraud or misrepresentation if the Agreement’s merger clause unambiguously states that it was the party’s intention that the agreement supersedes all precontractual agreements and representations, both oral and written. First Data POS v. Willis Group (2001)
Any agreement that is not to be performed within one year from the making thereof, must be in writing and signed by the parties. Civil Code 1350
One cannot sue for fraud based upon the alleged breach of an oral contract which would itself be unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. Hieke v. George (1999)
Where a representation is controverted by the express terms of the contract, a plaintiff will be unable, as a matter of law, to establish that his reliance is justifiable. Callaway v. DeMain Swine Breeders (1998)
However, if the merger clause is included in the contract for sale of goods, under UCC, the parol evidence of the alleged misrepresentation is admissible, and validity of the contract is to be determined by the jury.
Dana v. Piedmont Motors (1974)
Synthesized Rule #1 …show more content…
In addition, when a representation is controverted by the express terms of the contract, a plaintiff will be unable, as a matter of law, to establish that his reliance is justifiable. However, if the merger clause is included in the contact for a sale of goods, under Uniform Commercial Code, the parol evidence of alleged misrepresentation is admissible, and validity of the contract is to be determined by the