Colin and Natalie orally agreed with Medical Center X for an in vitro fertilization procedure that would not result in the birth of an autistic child.They later signed a written contract stating that the medical center could not promise an absence of physical or mental defects and assumed no responsibility for such defects.The child conceived had autism.Which of the following is the most likely result of the parents' suit for breach of the oral agreement if the court follows the decision Scalisi et al.v.New York University Medical Center discussed in the text?
A)The oral agreement will be enforced,and the parents will prevail under the exception to the parol evidence rule involving evidence of prior dealings or usage of trade.
B)The oral agreement will be enforced,and the parents will prevail under the exception to the parol evidence rule involving contracts conditioned on orally agreed upon terms.
C)The oral agreement will be enforced,and the parents will prevail under the exception to the parol evidence rule involving contracts that are not final as they are part written and part oral.
D)The medical center will prevail based upon the written contract.
E)The oral agreement will be enforced,and the parents will prevail under the exception to the parol evidence rule involving contracts that are incomplete.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A)The state court of appeals ruled in favor of the medical center finding that even if the alleged oral promises had been made,they were inadmissible in light of the existence of the subsequent written agreement directly contradictory to them.
B)The state court of appeals ruled in favor of the medical center finding that even if the alleged oral promises had been made,they were inadmissible in light of the existence of the subsequent written agreement directly contradictory to them.
C)The state court of appeals ruled in favor of the medical center finding that even if the alleged oral promises had been made,they were inadmissible in light of the existence of the subsequent written agreement directly contradictory to them.
D)The state court of appeals ruled in favor of the medical center finding that even if the alleged oral promises had been made,they were inadmissible in light of the existence of the subsequent written agreement directly contradictory to them.
E)The state court of appeals ruled in favor of the medical center finding that even if the alleged oral promises had been made,they were inadmissible in light of the existence of the subsequent written agreement directly contradictory to them.

Colin and Natalie Orally Agreed with Medical Center X for an in Vitro