1. Business Law: Wagner v. Columbia Chad Jenkins
1. Did Wagner’s offered evidence of the “Love Song” agreement explain or contradict the
“Charlie’s Angels” contract? Explain the court’s reasoning.
It contradicts it. The court stated the problem with Wagner’s extrinsic evidence is that is
does not explain the contract language. Under the parole evidence rule, extrinsic
evidence is not admissible to contradict express terms in a written contract. The contract
stated the conditions which the parties were to share the films profits, and those
conditions had not occurred. Columbia obtained their rights to the film separately.
2. Briefly explain the parole evidence rule. How does the parole evidence rule apply to the
following quotation: …Justice Holmes explained, parole evidence is not admissible to
show that when the parties ‘said five hundred feet they agreed it should mean one
hundred inches, or that Bunker Hill Monument should signify the Old South Church
[Goode v. Riley, 153 Mass. 585, 28 N.E. 228 (1891)].’ ”
The parole evidence rule prohibits the introduction at trial of evidence of the parties’
prior negotiations, prior agreements, or contemporaneous oral agreements that contradicts
or varies the terms of the party’s written contract. The written contract is assumed to be
the complete embodiment of the party’s agreement. Justice Holmes was making a point
that if the contract says one thing then an oral agreement cannot be admissible to
contradict what is written. For example a contract may state five hundred feet, however
the plaintiff may state that he was in an oral agreement of hundred inches. A written
contract is the final agreement and cannot be changed unless it is ambiguous.

2. Business Law: Wagner v. Columbia Chad Jenkins
3. Why is it a good idea the contracts be written? How might the plain meaning doctrine and
the parole evidence rule be more complicated to apply if a contract was oral rather than
written?
If one once to enter into a legal agreement where the courts can protect both parties, then
it should be written in a contract. Contract law assures the parties to private agreements
that the covenant they make will be enforced. There are a lot of times someone will not
go through with an agreement, in these cases it is always crucial to have a written
contract. If a contract was oral and not written then it would be extremely difficult as the
courts would have to determine who is telling the truth. In this situation it would be
ambiguous as it is determined a “he said, she said” circumstance. When a contract is
written and clear to understanding, then one cannot argue the facts and what is written.