Prentice Hall Corporation contracts with SUNY Brockport to sell certain English textbooks which the college bookstore agrees to purchase. The written agreement, which appears complete on its face, requires shipment in 3 weeks. One week after signing the written contract, the representative from Prentice Hall agreed to ship the books immediately if Brockport agrees to pay 10 cents extra per book. The representative from Brockport agrees to the extra payment. Prentice Hall failed to ship the books immediately. When Brockport sued Prentice Hall for damages, Prentice Hall claimed Brockport could not prove the agreement for immediate shipment because of the parol evidence rule. Does the parol evidence rule prevent Brockport from proving the agreement for immediate shipment? A) Yes. B) No.
Prentice Hall Corporation contracts with SUNY Brockport to sell certain English textbooks which the college bookstore agrees to purchase. The written agreement, which appears complete on its face, requires shipment in 3 weeks. One week after signing the written contract, the representative from Prentice Hall agreed to ship the books immediately if Brockport agrees to pay 10 cents extra per book. The representative from Brockport agrees to the extra payment. Prentice Hall failed to ship the books immediately. When Brockport sued Prentice Hall for damages, Prentice Hall claimed Brockport could not prove the agreement for immediate shipment because of the parol evidence rule. Does the parol evidence rule prevent Brockport from proving the agreement for immediate shipment?
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
AI-generated content may present inaccurate or offensive content that does not represent bartleby’s views.
Unlock instant AI solutions
Tap the button
to generate a solution