← All Authorities
United States Leading Case construction interpretation

Pacific Gas and Electric Co v G.W. Thomas Drayage & Rigging Co

442 P.2d 641 (Cal. 1968)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
Year1968
StatusBinding authority

Summary

California Supreme Court held that extrinsic evidence is always admissible to show that written contract language is ambiguous, rejecting plain-meaning rule.

Key Principle

parol evidence; California approach admitting extrinsic evidence to show ambiguity

Area of Law

Contract

Related Cases

Toll (FGCT) Pty Ltd v Alphapharm Pty Ltd (2004) 219 CLR 165

A party who signs a contractual document is bound by its terms whether or not they read or understood them, affirming the objective theory of contract.

Pacific Carriers Ltd v BNP Paribas (2004) 218 CLR 451

An agent's ostensible authority is determined by what the principal communicated to the third party, not by private arrangements between principal and agent.

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Glengallan Investments Pty Ltd (2004) 218 CLR 471

Entire agreement clauses and the parol evidence rule preclude reliance on extrinsic implied terms inconsistent with a written contract.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Pacific Gas and Electric Co v G.W. Thomas Drayage & Rigging Co and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Pacific Gas and Electric Co v ...