Riverisland Ruling Gives Calif. Fraud Victims Fairer Shake

Law360, New York (January 23, 2013, 3:08 PM EST) -- In a decision that will have a dramatic effect on contract and lender liability litigation, the California Supreme Court decided in Riverisland Cold Storage Inc. v. Fresno-Madera Production Credit Association, Case No. S190581, that the parol evidence rule does not bar the introduction of evidence of fraud, even if the misrepresentations directly contradict the terms of a written contract. In so ruling, the Court directly overturned its decision in Bank of America etc. Assn. v. Pendergrass, which has been the law in California, albeit reluctantly, for over 75 years.[1]

Importantly, the court left open the question of whether the borrower could...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS