Legal Opinion
Wilson Arlington Company Selden Ring Irving Axelrad v. Prudential Insurance Company of America
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided August 27, 1990No. 88-6273PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge:
The answer to the question presented in this appeal is, yes, Virginia, there is a parol evidence rule.
I
In early 1984, Prudential put up for sale one of its hotel properties — the Arlington Hyatt Hotel located in Arlington, Virginia. Prudential circulated a limited number of informational brochures describing the property and offering it for $26.5 million. Selden Ring, a partner in Wilson Arlington, responded to one of the brochures with an offer to purchase, which he submitted to Prudential on August 15, 1984. The offer met Prudential’s asking price and provided that…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. G. W. Thomas Drayage & Rigging Co.California Supreme Court · 1968
- Darner Motor Sales, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1984
- Wilson v. HolyfieldSupreme Court of Virginia · 1984
- Berry v. KlingerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1983
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Nedlloyd Lines B v. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- United States v. Westlands Water DistrictDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2001
- Taylor v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 1993
- Saffon v. Wells Fargo & Co. Long Term Disability PlanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- United States v. Jose Luis NunezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.