Robinson v. Tripco Investment, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Utah
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBillings, Judge
126 I concur with the majority except to the extent that it holds that the merger doctrine precludes an action for negligent misrepresentation in this case. Because I conclude that the merger doctrine does not bar plaintiff's negligent misrepresentation claim, I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion. I would remand for a trial on the issue of negligent misrepresentation.
127 Under the merger doctrine, a deed is the final, integrated agreement of the parties and abrogates all prior agreements, whether written or oral. See, eg., Maynard v. Wharton, 912 P.2d 446, 449-450…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Martens Chevrolet, Inc. v. SeneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
- Zimmerman v. KentMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1991
- Grube v. DaunCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1992
- Dugan v. JonesUtah Supreme Court · 1980
- Keller v. A.O. Smith Harvestore Products, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1991
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.