The court permits Peepin to bring in the testimonyofGlindaWitch in which she said that the win-loss record does not pertain to the "satisfactory performance" clause in the employment contract. This must mean that:

Group of answer choices

the parol evidence rule was applicable in this case

the term "satisfactory performance" was ambiguous

the term "unsatisfctory performance was not ambiguous

Witch perjured herself and can be held responsible

the contract violated the statute of frauds and the testimony goes to show that

Witch's statement pertained to the terms for keeping Peepin on and not on the causes to fire him