Kendra owns a sporting goods store. She is in court because of a breach of contract lawsuit against her supplier. One of the terms of the contract is ambiguous. Would the court likely permit Kendra to testify as to oral conversations about the ambiguous terms of the contract?
A) Yes, but only to clarify the ambiguous contract terms.
B) No, because there is a written contract.
C) No, but she could provide additional writings.
D) No, because it would modify the contract.
E) Yes, where ambiguous terms exist, she may provide oral evidence that modifies the contract.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

EWhen a contract contains ambiguous terms, courts often allow oral testimony to clarify those terms. This is known as the parol evidence rule exception, which permits the introduction of oral evidence to explain, clarify, or supplement the written contract without necessarily modifying its terms. Thus, both options that allow for oral testimony in the context of ambiguity are correct.

Kendra Owns a Sporting Goods Store