BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    On-Demand

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

  • work Practice Area

    Class Action and Other Litigation

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Thursday, September 23, 2021

  • schedule Time

    1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

  • timer Program Length

    90 minutes

Credit Information

  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.

$297.00
CLE
ALL

This CLE course will sharpen commercial litigators' knowledge, authority, and persuasiveness when pressing clients' position on the meaning and applicability of "merger" clauses in contracts. The program will discuss courts' increasing reluctance to enforce merger clauses, review the different ways merger clauses are construed and the parol evidence rule, suggest how to recognize potentially flawed or incongruent methodologies their judge might be using, and offer strategies to counteract them.

Faculty

David A. Shargel
Partner
Bracewell LLP

Mr. Shargel is a business litigator with extensive experience representing clients in complex commercial disputes and arbitrations. Selected as a Super Lawyers “Rising Star” for five consecutive years (2012 – 2016), he has built his practice representing clients in a wide range of business sectors and circumstances. Mr. Shargel's experience includes litigating contract disputes, shareholder disputes, business valuation, insurance coverage and fraud. He also handles real estate, construction and employment disputes as well as matters involving constitutional law such as under the Commerce and Due Process clauses. Additionally, as co-head of the firm’s ePractice Department, Mr. Shargel assists firm attorneys with eDiscovery best practices and guidance, as well as case-specific discovery strategy and management.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio
Rachel B. Goldman
Partner
Bracewell LLP

Ms. Goldman is a commercial litigator with over 20 years of experience in federal and state courts, at the trial and appellate levels, and in both domestic and international arbitration proceedings. She represents clients in various sectors, including finance, renewable and conventional energy, construction and private equity. Ms. Goldman's practice focuses on complex commercial disputes, such as breach of contract and fraud claims, securities litigation, bankruptcy litigation, construction litigation, RICO and False Claims Act litigation. Her practice also includes challenges to government action under the Commerce, Takings and Supremacy Clauses, and First Amendment and libel actions. In addition, Ms. Goldman is actively involved in the firm’s monitorship and compliance matters.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio

Description

Although the use of merger clauses is ubiquitous in both commercial and consumer contracts, courts are becoming less inclined to enforce them on their face. Counsel must understand and be prepared to offer evidence that that the contract accurately states the parties' genuine, final, and ultimate intent and that the merger clause was not just boilerplate imposed by the party with more leverage.

The parol evidence rule usually prevents extrinsic evidence to vary the terms of a contract, but other evidence may be used to supplement or explain the agreement. It can be difficult, however, to distinguish between explaining and contradicting. Moreover, numerous exceptions to the parol evidence rule can come into play.

Whether the court employs the "textual" or "contextual" or a "something-in-between" approach to contract interpretation is critical, but the law is so confusing and muddled that commentators disagree as to which is the "majority" approach. Contract interpretation has been called the "least settled, most contentious" area of contract law and constitutes the largest source of contract litigation.

Listen as this experienced panel of litigators discusses the enforcement of merger clauses, the parol evidence rule, and the highly unsettled and contradictory approaches courts consider when construing contracts.

Outline

  1. Overview of contract interpretation and the parol evidence rule
  2. Role of merger clauses
  3. Enforcing (or challenging) merger clauses
    1. Textual vs. contextual approach
    2. Explaining vs. contradicting
    3. Ambiguities
    4. Evidence required

Benefits

The panel will review these and other crucial issues:

  • What weight should a merger clause be given, and should the answer depend on factors such as the sophistication of the parties?
  • Is the parol evidence rule still viable, or have the exceptions swallowed the rule?
  • When is a contract ambiguous, really?
  • What evidence should a court consider to determine, for example, how thoroughly a contract was negotiated or the relative leverage of the parties?
  • What is the practical difference between the textual and contextual approaches?
  • What is the difference between a complete merger clause and a partial merger clause?
  • What language in merger clauses creates the most debate?