Opinion ID: 1267560
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Defendants' Counterclaim in Contract

Text: We agree with the Court of Appeals' view that Elmwood's breach of contract counterclaims are precluded by the parol evidence rule. None of the alleged breaches of contract can be evidenced by express contractual provisions. The parol evidence rule prevents the introduction of extrinsic evidence of agreements or understandings contemporaneous with or prior to execution of a written instrument when the extrinsic evidence is to be used to contradict, vary, or explain the written instrument. Iseman v. Hobbs , 290 S.C. 482, 351 S.E. (2d) 351 (Ct. App. 1986). This is especially true when the written instrument. contains a merger or integration clause. United States leasing Corp. v. Janicare, Inc. , 294 S.C. 312, 364 S.E. (2d) 202 (Ct. App. 1988). Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for a trial on the merits regarding issues (I) and (II) as set forth in this opinion. GREGORY, C.J. HARWELL, J., and HUGHSTON and HOWELL, Acting Associate Justices, concur.