Which of the Following Was the Result in Cousins Subs

Multiple Choice

Which of the following was the result in Cousins Subs Systems, Inc. v. Michael R. McKinney, the case in the text in which defendant McKinney asserted in a counterclaim that he was entitled to terminate an agreement requiring that he operate submarine sandwich shops because Cousins Subs Systems, Inc. failed to meet promises it verbally made to him?

A) That based on principles of equity McKinney could rely on oral statements in contradiction of the written agreement involved.
B) That the oral agreements could be relied upon by McKinney because they supplemented, rather than contradicted, the written agreement.
C) That the alleged oral agreements contradicted the written agreement signed by McKinney and would not, therefore, be considered.
D) That the court would allow the jury to determine whether the written contract should be supplemented by the alleged oral statements.
E) That the written agreement failed to set forth fair principles but that the alleged oral agreements would be disregarded in favor of a form contract contained in the state's franchise law.