Legal Opinion

Cromeens v. Arnold Cotton Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided December 31, 1970No. 531Published

1Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

Appellee in his motion for rehearing contends that the plea of payment asserted by appellants could not be considered by the trial court because the same was in violation of the parol evidence rule in that it varied the unconditional written promise of appellants to pay a sum certain at a stated time; that “the parole evidence rule precludes the reception of any evidence to vary the express unconditional promise contained in the writing, to pay a sum certain in money at a fixed future time and for this reason the Summary Judgment evidence of Appellants did not raise any…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. First National Bank v. TallyTexas Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Collins v. Republic Nat. Bank of DallasTexas Supreme Court · 1953
  3. David Berg & Co. v. RavkindCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1964
  4. Heidenheimer v. Higginbotham-Bartlett Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1932
  5. Ormsby v. State Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1939

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API