In what manner could you reasonably expect a court to apply the parol evidence rule when asked to interpret the meaning of a nebulous term in a written contract?
A) Abide by the rule and use its discretion to infer a clarification of the term.
B) Disregard the rule and allow extrinsic evidence to resolve the ambiguity.
C) Abide by the rule and use its discretion to apply implied terms for clarification.
D) Disregard the rule and apply the reasonable person test to interpret the term.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The parol evidence rule generally prohibits the admission of extrinsic evidence to alter, contradict, or add to the terms of a written contract. However, when a term in a contract is ambiguous or unclear, courts may allow extrinsic evidence to clarify the meaning of the nebulous term, thus making option B correct.

In What Manner Could You Reasonably Expect a Court to Apply