Sco-Mar, Inc. v. RHODE ISLAND TOOL COMPANY, INC.
Cases that cite this one
4 later published cases cite this decision.
- Demirs v. Plexicraft, Inc. (District Court, D. Rhode Island 1991)
- Nelson v. Ptaszek (R.I. 1986)
- Ventures Management Co., Inc. v. Geruso (R.I. 1981)
- Cranston Teachers Ass'n v. Cranston School Committee (R.I. 1978)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
In our opinion, the disputed provision of the writing in question is susceptible of more than one meaning. Evidence of prior or contemporaneous oral statements was therefore admissible to aid in its interpretation and was not barred by the parol evidence rule. Farrell v. Meadowbrook Corp., 111 R. I. 747, 749, 306 A.2d 806, 807 (1973); Hawkins v. Smith, 105 R. I. 669, 674-76, 254 A.2d 747, 751-52 (1969); Supreme Woodworking Co. v. Zuckerberg, 82 R. I. 247, 252, 107 A.2d 287, 290 (1954). Inasmuch as the explanatory evidence here admitted supports the result reached in the Superior Court, the defendant’s appeal must be denied and dismissed, and the judgment appealed from affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.