John H. Miner and Holly K. Miner - Page 11




                                       - 11 -                                         
          Petitioner and Jasiak agreed to a written change in the agreement           
          barring prepayment and providing a security interest; this shows            
          that they understood that changes in the agreement must be in               
          writing.                                                                    
               Petitioners ask us to consider parol evidence of Jasiak's              
          and petitioner's intent regarding payment for Jasiak's promise              
          not to compete.  Petitioners' reliance on parol evidence is                 
          unhelpful to petitioners for two reasons.  First, the evidence is           
          not credible.  Petitioner testified that he intended for Jasiak's           
          oral promise to be part of the written agreement and that he                
          would not have agreed to Cost Less buying Jasiak's stock without            
          Jasiak's covenant not to compete.  Petitioners contend that                 
          Jasiak's testimony shows that petitioner intended that part of              
          the $175,000 payment from Cost Less to Jasiak was for his oral              
          promise not to compete.  Jasiak testified that none of the                  
          $175,000 was for the covenant not to compete.  Jasiak's testimony           
          is consistent (and petitioner's position is inconsistent) with              
          the written agreement and with Jasiak's and petitioner's decision           
          to delete any references to a covenant not to compete from their            
          written agreement.  We found Jasiak's testimony to be more                  
          credible than petitioner's.                                                 
               The second reason petitioners' reliance on parol evidence is           
          unhelpful to them is that under Arizona's parol evidence rule, we           
          do not consider parol evidence where the written agreement is               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011