$163.$ The Parol Evidence Rule. Evangel Temple Assem$-$bly of God leased a facility from Wood Care Centers, Inc., to house evacuees who had lost their homes in Hurricane Katrina. One clause in the lease contract said that Evangel could terminate the lease at any time by giving Wood Care notice and paying $10$ percent of the balance remaining on the lease. Another clause stated that if the facility was not given a property tax exemption $($as a church$),$ Evangel had the option to terminate the lease without making the $10$ percent payment. Nine months later, the last of the evacuees left the facility, and Evangel notified Wood Care that it would end the lease. Wood Care demanded the $10$ percent payment. Is parol evidence admissible to interpret this lease? Why or why not? $[$Wood Care Centers, Inc. v$.$ Evangel Temple Assembly of God of Wichita Falls, $307$ S$.$W$\mathrm{.}3$d $816($Tex$.$App.$$Fort Worth $2010)]($See The Parol Evidence Rule.$)$