Indiana Statutes
§ 26-1-2-202 — Record intended as final expression of parties' agreement; parol or extrinsic evidence
Terms with respect to which the confirmatory memoranda of the parties agree or which are otherwise set forth in a record intended by the parties as a final expression of their agreement with respect to such terms as are included therein may not be contradicted by evidence of any prior agreement or of a contemporaneous oral agreement but may be explained or supplemented:
(a)by course of dealing or usage of trade (IC 26-1-1-205) or by
course of performance (IC 26-1-1-205); and
(b)by evidence of consistent additional terms, unless the court
finds the record to have been intended also as a complete and
exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement.
Formerly: Acts 1963, c.317, s.2-202. As amended by
P.L.152-1986, SEC.126; P.L.143-2007, SEC.9; P.L.199-2023,
SEC.6.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Indiana § 26-1-2-202 (Record intended as final expression of parties' agreement; parol or extrinsic evidence) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Sanco, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., Sanco, Inc., Plaintiff-Cross-Appellee v. Ford Motor Co., Defendant-Cross-Appellant
771 F.2d 1081 (Seventh Circuit, 1985)
Travel Craft, Inc. v. Wilhelm Mende GmbH & Co.
552 N.E.2d 443 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1990)
Carpetland U.S.A. v. Payne
536 N.E.2d 306 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1989)
Urschel Farms, Inc. v. Dekalb Swine Breeders, Inc.
858 F. Supp. 831 (N.D. Indiana, 1994)
Wildwood Industries, Inc. v. Genuine MacHine Design, Inc.
587 F. Supp. 2d 1035 (N.D. Indiana, 2008)
Bowyer v. Vollmar
505 N.E.2d 162 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1987)
Coffing v. Burdick (In Re Burdick)
65 B.R. 105 (N.D. Indiana, 1986)
OEC-Diasonics, Inc. v. Major
622 N.E.2d 1025 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1993)
Pepsi-Cola Co. v. Steak 'N Shake, Inc.
981 F. Supp. 1149 (S.D. Indiana, 1997)
Art Hill, Inc. v. Heckler
457 N.E.2d 242 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1983)
Travel Craft, Inc. v. Wilhelm Mende GmbH & Co.
534 N.E.2d 238 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1989)
Polycon Industries Inc v. R & B Plastics Machinery, LLC
(N.D. Indiana, 2024)
County Motors, LLC, and Thomas Kouttoulas v. Clarence Russell, Jr., and Angela Sullivan (mem. dec.)
(Indiana Court of Appeals, 2017)
Nearby Sections
15
§ 26-1-1-0.3
Certain security interests considered perfected§ 26-1-1-0.5
Status of certain security interests; conditions; lapsing of perfection;
filing of financing statements§ 26-1-1-101
Short title; application§ 26-1-1-104
Construction against implicit repeal§ 26-1-1-105
Repealed§ 26-1-1-106
Remedies to be liberally administered§ 26-1-1-108
Severability