What defines a "completed written contract" under the Parole Evidence Rule?

The concept of a "completed written contract" under the Parole Evidence Rule is best defined as a contract that is finalized and cannot be changed except in writing. This rule essentially states that once parties have made a written agreement that is intended to be a complete and final expression of their agreement, any prior or contemporaneous verbal agreements or understandings that might contradict the written terms cannot be admitted as evidence in court to change the interpretation of the contract.

Choosing this definition aligns with the principle that a finalized contract should provide certainty and clarity to the parties involved. If changes are to be made, they must be documented in writing, ensuring that both parties agree to the modifications formally. This protects the integrity of the contract and helps avoid misunderstandings that could arise from informal discussions or verbal agreements made after the contract has been signed.

In contrast, suggesting that a contract requires continuous verbal updates overlooks the finality intended by the written contract, while the idea that it can be altered by informal discussions undermines the purpose of the Parole Evidence Rule. Additionally, the notion that a contract must be notarized for validity is not inherently accurate, as notarization is not a requirement for all contracts to be legally binding.