Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 45.02.202 (2026)
Final written expression; parol or extrinsic evidence
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 45.02.202. Final written expression; parol or extrinsic evidence.
Terms with respect to which the confirmatory memoranda of the parties agree, or that are otherwise set out in a writing intended by the parties as a final expression of their agreement with respect to the terms included in the writing, may not be contradicted by evidence of a prior agreement or of a contemporaneous oral agreement, but may be explained or supplemented
(1) by course of performance, course of dealing, or usage of trade (AS 45.01.303); and
(2) by evidence of consistent additional terms unless the court finds the writing was intended also as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement.
Terms with respect to which the confirmatory memoranda of the parties agree, or that are otherwise set out in a writing intended by the parties as a final expression of their agreement with respect to the terms included in the writing, may not be contradicted by evidence of a prior agreement or of a contemporaneous oral agreement, but may be explained or supplemented
(1) by course of performance, course of dealing, or usage of trade (AS 45.01.303); and
(2) by evidence of consistent additional terms unless the court finds the writing was intended also as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1983–2024 · leading case: Froines v. Valdez Fisheries Dev. Ass'n, 75 P.3d 83 (Alaska 2003).
Froines v. Valdez Fisheries Dev. Ass'n, 75 P.3d 83 (Alaska 2003). “Terms with respect to which the confirmatory memoranda of the parties agree, or which are otherwise set out in a writing intended by the parties as a final expression of their agreement with respect to the terms included in the writing, may not be contradicted by evidence of a…”
Alaska N. Dev., Inc. v. Alyeska Pipeline Serv. Co., 666 P.2d 33 (Alaska 1983). “If it is consistent, it may nevertheless be excluded if the court concludes that the consistent term would necessarily have been included in the writing by the parties if they had intended it to be part of their agreement.”
Nautilus Marine Enter., Inc. v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 305 P.3d 309 (Alaska 2013). “The parol evidence rule is codified in AS 45.02.202, which reads: Terms with respect to which the confirmatory memoranda of the parties agree, or that are otherwise set out in a writing intended by the parties as a final expression of their agreement with respect to the terms…”
Zamarello v. Reges, 321 P.3d 387 (Alaska 2014). “3d 83, 86-87 (Alaska 2003) (quoting AS 45.02.202(2)); see also Restatement (Second) or Contracts §§ 215, 216(1) (1981).”
Hayes v. Bering Sea Reindeer Prods., 983 P.2d 1280 (Alaska 1999). “316(a) provides: Words or conduct relevant to the creation of an express warranty and words or' conduct tending to negate or limit warranty shall be construed where reasonable as consistent with each other; but subject to the provisions on parol or extrinsic evidence (AS…”
United States of Am. v. AHTNA Constr. & Primary Prods., LLC (D. Alaska 2021). “28 131 AS 45.02.202. 132 Ex. 54. 1 final payment delivered to Midstate on the basis of the actual measured quantity of 2 square yards of material delivered by Midstate.”
Ahtna Design-Build, Inc. v. Asphalt Surfacing, Inc. (D. Alaska 2024). “3d at 86–87 (quoting Alaska Stat. § 45.02.202 (2)) (“The parol evidence rule forbids contradiction of partially integrated terms but allows them to be ‘explained or supplemented .”
Smallwood Creek, Inc. v. Build Alaska, LLC, 513 P.3d 253 (Alaska 2022). “” (quoting AS 45.02.202)). -15- 7601 conclude that Build Alaska held this position in bad faith, given the course of events — the parties were negotiating how to measure quantities for payment, and then the contract expressly provides (in bolded language) for one method — and…”
— Alaska Stat. § 45.02.202(2) — 2 cases
Froines v. Valdez Fisheries Dev. Ass'n, 75 P.3d 83 (Alaska 2003). “Terms with respect to which the confirmatory memoranda of the parties agree, or which are otherwise set out in a writing intended by the parties as a final expression of their agreement with respect to the terms included in the writing, may not be contradicted by evidence of a…”
Zamarello v. Reges, 321 P.3d 387 (Alaska 2014). “3d 83, 86-87 (Alaska 2003) (quoting AS 45.02.202(2)); see also Restatement (Second) or Contracts §§ 215, 216(1) (1981).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.