Rogers and Lennon entered into a written computer consulting agreement that requ

Question

Rogers and Lennon entered into a written computer consulting agreement that required Lennon to provide certain weekly reports to Rogers. The agreement also stated that Lennon would provide the computer equipment necessary to perform the services, and that Rogers' computer would not be used. As the parties were executing the agreement, they orally agreed that Lennon could use Rogers' computer. After executing the agreement, Rogers and Lennon orally agreed that Lennon would report on a monthly, rather than a weekly, basis. The parties now disagree on Lennon's right to use Rogers' computer and how often Lennon must report to Rogers. In the event of a lawsuit between the parties, the parole evidence rule will Select one: a. Not apply to any of the parties' agreements because the consulting agreement did not have to be in writing. D b. Prevent the admission into evidence of testimony regarding the fact that the parties agreed on monthly rather than weekly reports. c. Not Prevent the admission into evidence of testimony regarding Lennon's right to use Rogers' computer. d. Not prevent the admission into evidence of Rogers' and Lennon's oral agreement that Lennon would report on a monthly, rather than a weekly, basis. e. Answer is C and D only

Explanation / Answer

E) Answer is C and D only.

It is because oral agreement is as important as written agreement. Also breaching of oral agreement can cause penalty to the defendant. So, the conversation and agreement between Roger and Lennon is equal valuable. And to prove this oral agreement the lawsuit can arrange the admission of evidence as the evidence can prove the truth of the oral agreement.

Hope this helps :)

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse R
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.