Dennison v. Harden
Washington Supreme Court
186 P.2d 908 (1947)
- Written by Kheana Pollard, JD
Facts
M. L. Dennison (plaintiff) entered into a contract to purchase property from Charles Harden (defendant). The contract included a provision that stated that the purchase would include “property and fruit trees, all tools, tractor, truck, fertilizer, etc., fruit trees, berry bushes, and crops in the ground.” Later, Dennison alleged that Harden warranted that there were 276 Pacific Gold peach trees on the property. There were no peach trees on the property, and Dennison insisted that the warranty was breached. Dennison filed suit against Harden. Documents to support the alleged warranty and documents from a nursery that allegedly supplied the 276 Pacific Gold peach trees were presented at trial but were not admitted due to the parol-evidence rule. The lower court found in favor of Harden. Dennison appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hill, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
