Kramer and Biff entered into a formal purchase and sale agreement with respect to Kramer's house.Two weeks later,Biff revisited Kramer and offered to purchase all of Kramer's custom yard and deck furniture too.The price Biff offered was $2500 more than the last offer Kramer had received,and he accepted the offer.In these circumstances,if a dispute ensues,will the parol evidence rule play a role?
A) It will be used to prevent extrinsic evidence regarding the oral agreement.
B) It will not play a role; because the oral agreement deals with land and furniture,it is invalid.
C) It will be applied to prevent a challenge of the written agreement.
D) It will not play a role,owing to the distinct nature of the collateral contract and price.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The parol evidence rule generally prohibits the introduction of evidence of prior or contemporaneous oral agreements that would contradict a later written contract. However, in this case, the oral agreement regarding the yard and deck furniture is a separate and distinct transaction from the sale of the house, and it involves a different subject matter (personal property vs. real property). Therefore, the parol evidence rule would not prevent the introduction of evidence about this separate agreement, especially since it does not contradict the terms of the written house sale agreement.

Kramer and Biff Entered into a Formal Purchase and Sale