Talk:Integration clause
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Merger Discussion[edit]
I am unaware of any common usage for integration clauses other than regarding the parol evidence rule (however, I am only a first year student and so may be entirely wrong, which is why I am initiating discussion instead of simply merging). I will start fleshing out the parol evidence rule page with more on everything, and will delete this page when all information has been transferred.DOH (talk) 01:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Effect of Integration Clause[edit]
I think modern jurisprudence says that an integration clause raises a rebuttable presumption of complete integration. I'll edit upon confirmation. -- 69.88.118.242
- Geezus, yes, you're right. That article is W-R-O-N-G on an incredibly fundamental aspect of those clauses. I just fixed it. Lawyer2b (talk) 23:51, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- This depends on jurisdiction. In a Williston jurisdiction (Two-Part Test), a proper merger clause establishes a presumption of complete integration, which I don't believe is rebuttable. The Corbin test, OTOH, takes all evidence into consideration including the factors in Hatley.DOH (talk) 01:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Is this the same as a 'four corners clause'?--194.78.17.162 (talk) 10:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)