When the Ann (the buyer) and Billie (the seller) entered into a contract for the sale of computers, they included an integration clause that stated that the written agreement represented the entirety of the agreement. Later, there arose a contract dispute over the quantity of computers to be shipped to Ann. Ann sued Billie in court and sought to introduce evidence that there was a prior oral agreement that Billie would send her ten computers instead of the five that were written in the contract. The judge ruled that such evidence of an oral agreement was inadmissible under the parol evidence rule, because there was an integration clause.
parol evidence rule
Show on page(s):