Contracts & ExecutionQuestion 841 of 1605
Which of the following is generally an EXCEPTION where evidence outside the written contract may still be admitted despite the parol evidence rule?
a.To add a term the party forgot to negotiate
b.To show the contract was procured by fraud
c.To contradict a clear, integrated term the party now dislikes
d.To simply change the agreed price because a party regrets it
Explanation
The parol evidence rule has recognized exceptions: outside evidence may be admitted to show fraud, duress, mistake, illegality, or lack of consideration, to clarify an ambiguity, or to prove a separate collateral agreement. Proving that the contract was induced by fraud is a classic exception. The rule still bars using outside statements merely to contradict clear integrated terms, to rewrite the price out of regret, or to insert forgotten terms.
Practice all 1605 questions free — no signup required.
Related questions on this topic
- A 'novation' occurs when:
- A written subcontract requires the general contractor's prior written approval before the subcontractor may assign the subcontract. The subcontractor assigns it anyway with no approval. The assignment is most likely:
- The parol evidence rule generally limits a party's ability to:
- A written contract contains a clause stating, 'This document is the entire and final agreement of the parties, and no other promises apply.' This is known as:
- Termination of a construction contract 'for cause' typically means the contract is ended because:
- A 'termination for convenience' clause allows a party (often the owner) to:
Last reviewed: · editorial process
Sen Lin, PrepPass Founder · Verified against California CSLB Contractor License Law & Business Exam · How we review
Reviewed by Abraham Chen — Licensed California General Contractor (CSLB License #1101856 — verify)