Maday v. Grathwohl, et al., 805 N.W.2d 285 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011)

(parties entered into manure easement agreement over plaintiff’s property with plaintiff receiving reduced fertilizer costs and expenses in return, but did not require plaintiff to pay for manure or require defendant to provide manure; when not all manure used in 2009 and 2010, defendant sold unused manure to third parties and plaintiff sued claiming right to unused manure based on oral agreement; trial court granted summary judgment for defendant because evidence related to oral agreement was inadmissible parol evidence; appellate court affirmed on basis that oral agreement addressed same subject matter as written easement and was inconsistent; easement contained integration clause). 

CALT does not provide legal advice. Any information provided on this website is not intended to be a substitute for legal services from a competent professional. CALT's work is supported by fee-based seminars and generous private gifts. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in the material contained on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of Iowa State University.

RSS​ Facebook Twitter