Under the parol evidence rule, an integration clause generally bars the admission of prior oral terms to modify a written contract. Which statement best reflects this rule?

• A. Yes, because the integration clause excludes prior terms.
• B. No, because oral terms can always modify a written contract.
• C. Yes, but only if the terms are about price.
• D. No, because the rule only applies to fraud cases.

Answer: (A)

When a contract is fully integrated, the written document is treated as the complete and final agreement, so prior oral terms cannot be used to modify it. An integration (merger) clause signals that the writing contains all agreed terms, which is why prior terms are barred under the parol evidence rule. This is why the statement that the integration clause excludes prior terms best reflects the rule. It’s not that oral terms can always modify, and the rule isn’t limited to price or to fraud cases—those ideas are misunderstandings of the general principle.