On March 1, 2019, Central Manufacturing, Inc. ("Central") entered into a written contract with Equipment Purchase Company, Inc. ("Equipment") by which Central agreed to sell and Equipment agreed to buy a used mainframe computer and related peripheral equipment. The written contract included an integrated agreement clause. Pursuant to the written contract, Equipment was required to pay the purchase price of $300,000 and to remove the equipment from Central's offices on or about March 15, 2019. Equipment failed to pay for or to remove the computer equipment prior to March 15, 2019. On April 13, 2019, Central sent Equipment a letter stating that it considered Equipment to be in breach of the contract and that it intended to resell the computer equipment to another purchaser. By May 4, 2019, Central had resold the equipment to different parties for a total of $175,000. Central has filed suit against Equipment seeking $125,000 in damages representing the difference between the contract price $300,000, and the resell price $175,000.

At the trial, Central offered the written contract into evidence and it was admitted without objection. During Equipment's case in chief, Equipment offered as evidence to the trial court Exhibits A and B. These exhibits were correspondence between Central and Equipment which were dated prior to the date of the written contract. Exhibit A was a mailgram from Equipment to Central dated February 26, 2019 which contained several alternative contract terms for consideration. One of those terms provided equipment with the right of cancellation if its third party purchaser did not agree to subsequently buy the computer equipment. The final contract did not contain this provision. Exhibit B dated February 29, 2019, was Central's acceptance of Equipment's offer contained in Exhibit A.

At the time of trial, Central timely objected to the admission of the evidence contained in Exhibit A on the grounds that the exhibits were not relevant and violated the parole evidence rule.

You are the trial court judge and now must rule on Central's objection to the admission of Exhibits A and B into evidence.

a. What is the parole evidence rule cited by Central?

b. In considering the application of the parole evidence rule, what is a general definition of parole

evidence?

c. State concisely the arguments of each party to be made to the judge regarding the inadmissibility (Central) or the admissibility (Equipment) of Exhibits A and B .

d. Are Exhibits A and B excluded under the parole evidence rule?