An insured tries to introduce evidence at trial that the producer made an ORAL promise about additional coverage that was never written into the policy. Under California's parol evidence rule and the standard 'Entire Contract' provision required by California Insurance Code §10113, the court will generally:
Explanation
California Civil Code §1856 (parol evidence rule) provides that when parties have memorialized their agreement in a fully integrated written contract, prior or contemporaneous oral or written statements that contradict the writing are not admissible to vary its terms. California Insurance Code §10113 requires that the entire contract consist of the policy and the attached application; nothing not in the policy is generally part of the agreement. Exceptions exist for fraud, mutual mistake, true ambiguity (where extrinsic evidence may help interpret rather than contradict), and equitable reformation when the writing fails to reflect the parties' actual agreement. Option A overstates utmost good faith. Option B is too absolute; fraud and other exceptions apply. Option C fabricates a consent rule. The doctrine emphasizes the policy document as the definitive expression of coverage.
Law Reference: California Civil Code §1856 (parol evidence rule); CIC §10113 (entire contract)Practice all 315 questions free — no signup required.
Related questions on this topic
- Under California Insurance Code §10110.1, insurable interest in another's life is generally found in all of the following relationships EXCEPT:
- Insurance contracts are described as contracts of 'utmost good faith' (uberrimae fidei) PRIMARILY because:
- Because an insurance policy is a contract of 'adhesion,' California courts will generally interpret ambiguous language in the policy:
- On an insurance application, the applicant fails to disclose a serious heart condition that he knows about and that materially affects the risk. The insurer issues a life policy. Which California Insurance Code concept BEST describes this conduct?
- Two months after a California life policy is issued, the insured and insurer both realize that the policy mistakenly lists the face amount as $50,000 when the application clearly applied for and the agent confirmed $500,000, and the correct premium for $500,000 was paid. The appropriate remedy is:
- Which statement BEST describes the doctrine of WAIVER in California insurance law?
Last reviewed: · editorial process