In this case two members of the Court think that the judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals should be affirmed. Seven are of opinion that the judgment should be reversed and the judgment of the District Court affirmed — four because proof of the contract alleged in respondent’s affidavits on the motion for summary judgment is precluded by the applicable state parol evidence rule, and three because the contract is contrary to public policy and void, see Tool Company v. Norris,
American Seating Co. v. Zell
322 U.S. 709
SCOTUS1944Check TreatmentAI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
