What does the parole evidence rule state about contracts?

The parole evidence rule asserts that once a contract has been put into writing and is intended to be a complete and final representation of the parties' agreement, any prior oral or written agreements or negotiations that might contradict or add to the written terms cannot be used to change the meaning or effect of the written contract. This principle aims to ensure that the written document serves as the definitive source of the parties' agreement, promoting consistency and reliability in contractual relationships. Therefore, the written contract is regarded as the sole repository of the agreement, which helps prevent disputes over what was previously discussed or promised outside of the written terms.

The other options do not align with the core function of the parole evidence rule. For instance, the idea that oral agreements can override a written contract contradicts the rule's very purpose, which is to uphold the integrity of the written document. The concept that amendments must be in writing is more related to the Statute of Frauds than to the parole evidence rule itself, which focuses on prior agreements rather than modifications. Lastly, the notion that contract validity is contingent upon being signed in the presence of witnesses is a separate legal consideration and does not pertain directly to the principle of the parole evidence rule.