What does the Parol Evidence Rule state?

• A. Written contracts supersede any prior or verbal agreements.
• B. Verbal agreements override written contracts.
• C. Parol evidence is always admissible in court.
• D. Oral statements can modify written terms without formal amendment.

Answer: (A)

Written contracts control the agreement and take precedence over any earlier or verbal promises when the writing is meant to be the final expression of what the parties agreed to. This is the essence of the Parol Evidence Rule: generally, evidence of prior or contemporaneous oral statements cannot be used to add to, modify, or contradict the terms of a written contract. The written document stands as the authoritative record.

There are important exceptions: if the contract isn’t fully integrated, or if the language is ambiguous, or to prove issues like fraud, mistake, or lack of consideration, or to show a separate agreement that wasn’t integrated into the writing. But the core idea is that the written contract supersedes prior or verbal agreements, which is why this option is the best choice.