FACTS: An example of the parol evidence rule playing out in an employment settin
ID: 363964 • Letter: F
Question
FACTS: An example of the parol evidence rule playing out in an employment setting was where a head coach contract became part of a legal dispute between West Virginia University and its former football coach, Rich Rodriguez. Rodriguez accepted a job at the University of Michigan four months after signing a two-year extension to coach at WV University. WV University sued Rodriguez at this point to recover $4 million under the buyout provision in its contract with the coach if he left before the end of the two years. In his answer to WV University's complaint, Rodriguez alleges that an oral promise was made to him in advance of signing the extension that the buyout clause would not be enforced if he left before the end of the two-year extension. QUESTIONS:
Is the two-year extension required to be in writing under the statute of frauds? (explain)
Do you think Rodriguez can use WV’s prior oral promise that the buyout clause would not be enforced as a defense to paying the 4 million? (explain)
What if WV University had made the oral promise at the time of the contract signing? (explain)
What if WV University had included the promise in an email sent prior to and not included in the final contract? (explain)
What if WV University had included the promise in an email sent after the final contract was signed? (explain)
Explanation / Answer
1) Yes, the two-year extension which WV university needs has to be in writing. A duly signed copy along with the facts agreed by Rodriguez has to be made available in the contract. Then, the contract will be valid under the statute of frauds.
A statute of frauds is a state law that applies to certain oral contracts. Generally speaking, a statute of frauds requires that certain contracts be in writing and signed by the parties.
2) No, Rodriguez cannot use WV's prior oral promise. Because, there is no written agreement on this, and WV can simply say that it has never promised that way. So, such oral agreements are void and not enforceable.
3) No, Oral promise is not enforceable in this case. The statutes were originally designed to prevent fraudulent conduct by one of the parties. The statutes also purposely cover those categories that can carry serious consequences for one of the parties. In this case, an oral promise can have serious consequences to Rodriguez. Hence, it is not enforceable unless it is written and agreed by both the parties.
4) It is still not enforceable. Any promise made has to be in the final contract. No prior emails, or oral agreements will be applicable.
5) Then it is enforceable. Any action or decision which is agreeable to both the parties after a contract has been signed will be valid and shall remain enforceable. Here, WV's promise after the contract has been signed, yet is agreeable to both the parties can be enforceable.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.