C-Thru Container Corp. v. Midland Manufacturing Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the Court
TERNUS, Justice.
This ease requires us to interpret and apply the trade-usage exception to the parol evidence rule embodied in Iowa Code chapter 554, Iowa’s Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.). The trial court held that parol evidence of trade usage was inadmissible and granted summary judgment to the defendant, Midland Manufacturing Company. We agree with the contrary decision of the court of appeals that the challenged evidence was admissible and generated a question of fact that prevented summary judgment. Therefore, we affirm the decision of the court of appeals and reverse the judgment of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hoffnagle v. McDonald's Corp.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1994
- Ralph's Distributing Company, a Corporation v. Amf, Inc., a Corporation, and Harley-Davidson Motor Co., Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1981
- Anderson v. Aspelmeier, Fisch, Power, Warner & EngbergSupreme Court of Iowa · 1990
- Shaw v. Soo Line RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1990
- Amoco Production Company, a Delaware Corporation v. Western Slope Gas Company, a Colorado CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Anderson v. Douglas & Lomason Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1995
- Lemars Mutual Insurance Co. v. JofferSupreme Court of Iowa · 1998
- Goodell v. Humboldt CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1998
- Gabrilson v. FlynnSupreme Court of Iowa · 1996
- Bearshield v. John Morrell & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1997
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.