California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Frazee v. Niles, B258334 (Cal. App. 2016):
Apart from being time-barred, the 2008 oral employment contract was superseded by an integrated 2008 written employment contract. There cannot be a verbal contract and an express written contract embracing the same subject, but requiring different results. (Starzynski v. Capital Public Radio, Inc. (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 33, 37-38.)
b. Alleged Fraud in the July 2008 Written Employment Contract
Frazee claims that he was defrauded because the July 2008 agreement "did not contain the full panoply of terms agreed to by [AMG's] CEO in the April 2008 Oral Agreement." The law "presumes that everyone who signs a contract has read it thoroughly," and its terms cannot be avoided with a claim that a signatory failed to read it; it is also presumed that the parties understood the agreement, particularly when they are sophisticated. (Roldan v. Callahan & Blaine (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 87, 93.)4
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.