The IT Law Wiki
(Adding categories)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Citation ==
 
== Citation ==
   
'''National Cash Register Co. v. Modern Transfer Co.,''' 224 Pa. Super. 138, 302 A.2d 486 (1973)([http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=210444741150912109&q=224+Pa.+Super.+138&hl=en&as_sdt=2002 full-text]).
+
'''National Cash Register Co. v. Modern Transfer Co.,''' 224 Pa. Super. 138, 302 A.2d 486 (1973) ([http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=210444741150912109&q=224+Pa.+Super.+138&hl=en&as_sdt=2002 full-text]).
   
 
== Factual Background ==
 
== Factual Background ==
Line 9: Line 9:
 
== Trial Court Proceedings ==
 
== Trial Court Proceedings ==
   
The court looked to the [[integration clause]] and, finding that its intent was to exclude prior statements from the final agreement, refused to admit testimony which contradicted the terms of the [[contract]].<ref>''Id.'' at 144-45, 302 A.2d at 490-91.</ref>
+
The court looked to the [[integration clause]] and, finding that its [[intent]] was to exclude prior statements from the final [[agreement]], refused to admit [[testimony]] which contradicted the terms of the [[contract]].<ref>''Id.'' at 144-45, 302 A.2d at 490-91.</ref>
   
==References==
+
== References ==
 
<references />
 
<references />
 
[[Category:Case]]
 
[[Category:Case]]
Line 17: Line 17:
 
[[Category:Case-U.S.-Contract]]
 
[[Category:Case-U.S.-Contract]]
 
[[Category:Contract]]
 
[[Category:Contract]]
  +
[[Category:1973]]

Latest revision as of 18:01, 16 October 2013

Citation[]

National Cash Register Co. v. Modern Transfer Co., 224 Pa. Super. 138, 302 A.2d 486 (1973) (full-text).

Factual Background[]

The defendant refused to accept an installed National Cash Register (NCR) computer, claiming that NCR had made a number of oral misrepresentations which induced Modern Transfer to execute the purchase contract.[1]

Trial Court Proceedings[]

The court looked to the integration clause and, finding that its intent was to exclude prior statements from the final agreement, refused to admit testimony which contradicted the terms of the contract.[2]

References[]

  1. 224 Pa. Super. at 140-42, 302 A.2d at 487-88.
  2. Id. at 144-45, 302 A.2d at 490-91.