Can Ganley introduce into evidence the oral representations made by Butler? Why or why not?
Butler Brothers Building Company sublet all of the work in a highway construction contract to Ganley Brothers, Inc. Soon thereafter, Ganley brought this action against Butler for fraud in the inducement of the contract. The contract, however, provided: “The contractor [Ganley] has examined the said contracts …, knows all the requirements, and is not relying upon any statement made by the company in respect thereto.” Can Ganley introduce into evidence the oral representations made by Butler? Why or why not?
The reality that the contract was decreased to writing may not advance the law. The written agreement may not be convinced by swindling. The law may not allow an accord of exemption to be drawn that may secure a person against self-cheating. No agreement of parties prevents the denial that the fraud in the incitement of the agreement may render the agreement to be revocable.
The decision would be in favor for Person G. In this case, the bail proof may be justifiable to show that the creation of the agreement may be obtained by false depictions. This may not vary the terms of the arrangement, which may be merely to show the existence of fraud that may authorize the refraining of the contract.