Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Taylor v. More, 263 N.W. 537.
- Michael Fosness, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
Timothy Michaels, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Apple Valley Red-E-Mix, Inc. v. Mills-Winfield Eng’g Sales, Inc., () , rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
-
Ola Abdelaziz, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Said another way, “[t]he rule forbids to add by parol when the writing is silent, as well as to vary where it speaks.” (quotation omitted).
- LHB Properties, LLC v. E. Y. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-
LHB Properties, LLC v. E. Y.
Minn. Ct. App. 2015
We also construe contracts “in the light of surrounding circumstances and the purpose for which it was executed.” Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448, 453, 263 N.W.
- Poser v. Abel 510 N.W.2d 224 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
-
Poser v. Abel
510 N.W.2d 224
Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448, 452 , 263 N.W.
- McNeill & Associates, Inc. v. ITT Life Insurance Corp. 446 N.W.2d 181 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
-
McNeill & Associates, Inc. v. ITT Life Insurance Corp.
446 N.W.2d 181
Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448, 454-55 , 263 N.W.
- Apple Valley Red-E-Mix, Inc. v. Mills-Winfield Engineering Sales, Inc. 436 N.W.2d 121 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
-
Apple Valley Red-E-Mix, Inc. v. Mills-Winfield Engineering Sales, Inc.
436 N.W.2d 121
Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448, 453 , 263 N.W.
- Petition of Minnesota Power & Light Co. 435 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
-
Petition of Minnesota Power & Light Co.
435 N.W.2d 550
Minn. Ct. App. 1989
As we indicated in Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448 , 263 N.W.
- Westendorf v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Co. 435 N.W.2d 110 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
-
Westendorf v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Co.
435 N.W.2d 110
Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448, 454-55 , 263 N.W.
- United Artists Communications, Inc. v. Corporate Property Investors 410 N.W.2d 39 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
-
United Artists Communications, Inc. v. Corporate Property Investors
410 N.W.2d 39
Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448, 454-55 , 263 N.W.
- Bussard v. College of Saint Thomas, Inc. 200 N.W.2d 155 Minn. 1972
-
Bussard v. College of Saint Thomas, Inc.
200 N.W.2d 155
Minn. 1972
As we indicated in Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448 , if the alleged oral agreement is one that parties similarly situated would embody in the written agreement, then the written document is “complete.” 2 Reading the written agreement dated May 30, 1964, in light of all the attendant circumstances, including the situation of the parties and the su
- McCarthy's St. Louis Park Cafe, Inc. v. Minneapolis Baseball & Athletic Ass'n 104 N.W.2d 895 Minn. 1960
-
McCarthy's St. Louis Park Cafe, Inc. v. Minneapolis Baseball & Athletic Ass'n
104 N.W.2d 895
Minn. 1960
Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448 , ; see, also, 9 Wigmore, Evidence (3 ed.) § 2430.
- Jimmerson v. Troy Seed Co. 53 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 1952
-
Jimmerson v. Troy Seed Co.
53 N.W.2d 273
Minn. 1952
The additional contractual terms sought to be established here by extrinsic parol evidence are not of such a nature as would be left to a collateral oral agreement as in Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448 , .
- Augustin v. Ziemer 22 N.W.2d 925 Minn. 1946
-
Augustin v. Ziemer
22 N.W.2d 925
Minn. 1946
In Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448, 451 , , this court said: “It is true that the ordinary receipt, which is nothing more than a written admission and not contractual in character, may be varied or supplemented by oral evidence; * * Order affirmed.
- Peterson v. Barnsdall Oil Co. 273 N.W. 260 Minn. 1937
-
Peterson v. Barnsdall Oil Co.
273 N.W. 260
Minn. 1937
The incompetent testimony must have been admitted over objection to bring the case within the rule laid down in Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448 , , in which the rule for varying the terms of a written instrument by parol are discussed.
- State Ex Rel. Canam Metals, Ltd. v. Department of Commerce 264 N.W. 789 Minn. 1936
-
State Ex Rel. Canam Metals, Ltd. v. Department of Commerce
264 N.W. 789
Minn. 1936
Thompson v. Libby, 34 Minn. 374 , ; Mitchill v. Lath, 247 N. Y. 377 , 160 N. E. 646 , 68 A. L. R. 239; Osterberg v. Section 30 Development Co. 160 Minn. 497 , ; Taylor v. More, 195 Minn. 448 , .