 | United States. Court of Claims - Law reports, digests, etc - 1934 - 914 pages
...White, quoting from a previous decision of the Supreme Court, said: "All this is irrelevant matter. The written contract merged all previous negotiations,...to express the final understanding of the parties." This is a service contract whereby the plaintiff undertook and agreed to perform certain services for... | |
 | United States. Court of Claims - 1919 - 740 pages
...is elementary that all prior negotiations are merged in the written contract, and that such contract is presumed in law to express the final understanding of the parties signing it, and that prior understandings can only be referred to for the purpose of expiaining and... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1878 - 808 pages
...eight hundred and eighty cords of wood before the contract was signed. All this is irrelevant matter. The written contract merged all previous negotiations',...to express the final understanding of the parties. If the contract did not express the true agreement, it was the claimant's folly to have signed it.... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1899 - 962 pages
...clearly announced in Brawley v. Ü. S., 96 U. S. 173, where It was said: "All this is irrelevant matter. The written contract merged all previous negotiations,...to express the final understanding of the parties. If the contract did not express the true agreement, It was the claimant's folly to have signed It.... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1920 - 1216 pages
...wanted, he had cut the 8SO cords of wood before the contract was signed. "All this is irrelevant matter. The written contract merged all previous negotiations,...to express the final understanding of the parties. If the contract did not express the true agreement, it was the claimant's folly to have signed it.... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1889 - 1172 pages
...facts are fully stated in the opinion. Messrs. John Seiden and George F. Edmunds, for Zenas C. Bobbins: The written contract merged all previous negotiations,...to express the final understanding of the parties. Brawley v. U. & 96 US 173 (24:624); Potomac Steamboat Co. v. upper Potomac Steamboat Co. 109 U. 8.... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1899 - 792 pages
...announced in Brawley v. United States, 96 US 168, 173, where it was said : " All this is irrelevant matter. The written contract merged all previous negotiations,...to express the final understanding of the parties. If the contract did not express the true agreement, it was the claimant's folly to have signed it.... | |
 | Wisconsin. Supreme Court, Frederic King Conover, Frederick William Arthur, Frederick C. Seibold, Arnold LeBell - Law reports, digests, etc - 1902 - 814 pages
...Wis. M. & F. Ins. Co. Bank v. Wilkin, 95 Wis. Bib Eiver L. Co. v. Ogilvie, 113 Wis. 482. 111. That the contract merged all previous negotiations, and is...to express the final understanding of the parties. Brawley v. US 96 US 168-173; Creighton v. Comstock, 27 Ohio St. 548 ; Pembroke I. Co. v. Parsons, 5... | |
 | United States. Comptroller of the Treasury - Expenditures, Public - 1905 - 958 pages
...intended. In Jirawl-ey v. United States (96 US, 173-174) Mr. Justice Bradley, in the opinion of the court, said: "The written contract merged all previous negotiations, and is presumed, in law, to express the tinal understanding of the parties. If the contract did not express the true agreement, it was the... | |
 | American Society of Engineering Contractors - Contractors - 1913 - 352 pages
...twice so ruled. In Brawley vs. United States, 96 US 173-174, Mr. Justice Bradley used this language : "The written contract merged all previous negotiations,...to express the final understanding of the parties. If the contract did not express the true agreement, it was claimant's folly to have signed it. The... | |
| |
The written contract merged all previous negotiations, and is presumed, in law, to express the final understanding of the parties. If the contract did not express the true agreement, it was the claimant's folly to have signed it. 
