Jacobson Wholesale Company and Kutner, the owner of a retail men's store, signed a written contract under which Jacobson was to sell 300 boxes of hosiery to Kutner at $5 per box. Jacobson sent the hosiery, and Kutner paid the $1,500. Jacobson sued Kutner for an additional $900 and at the trial offered evidence that shortly before signing the contract, Kutner had orally agreed to pay an additional $3 per box. The court held the evidence inadmissible. The principle that best justifies the legal decision in this case is that

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The principle of the parol evidence rule states that if a written contract is intended to be a complete and final representation of the parties' agreement, then evidence of prior or contemporaneous agreements that would contradict or modify the written contract is generally inadmissible. This principle is what justifies the court's decision to hold the evidence of the oral agreement inadmissible, as it contradicts the terms of the written contract between Jacobson and Kutner.

Jacobson Wholesale Company and Kutner, the Owner of a Retail