Utah justices weigh whether integration clauses bar contemporaneous arbitration agreements in used-car dispute

Summary

At oral argument in Montez v. National Buick GMC the Utah Supreme Court wrestled with whether a purchase contract's integration clause should automatically exclude contemporaneously signed arbitration agreements or whether trial courts may consider multiple signed writings to determine parties' intent.

SALT LAKE CITY ' The Utah Supreme Court heard argument in Montez v. National Buick GMC over whether a dealer'buyer transaction should be treated as a single integrated contract that forecloses consideration of a separately signed arbitration agreement.

Eric Olson, counsel for National Buick GMC, told the court he wants the justices to "reverse and remand the fact question of whether the parties intended the purchase agreement is a complete integration, or whether the party's final complete bargain included other contemporaneous writings." Olson argued that an integration clause should create a rebuttable presumption, not an absolute bar, and that district courts should be able to consider multiple contemporaneous signed contracts together to determine what the parties intended.

Opposing him, Merrick Stevenson, counsel for the respondent Montez, urged the court to affirm the Court of Appeals. "When a written agreement is clear and complete, we don't look…

Utah justices weigh whether integration clauses bar contemporaneous arbitration agreements in used-car dispute

Summary

Subscribe to keep reading