A farmer contracted to sell 100,000 bushels of wheat to a buyer. When the wheat arrived at the destination, the buyer discovered that the farmer had delivered only 96,000 bushels. The buyer sued the farmer for breach of contract. At the trial of the case, the court found that the written contract was intended as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement. The farmer offered to prove that in the wheat business, a promise to deliver a specified quantity is considered to be satisfied if the delivered quantity is within 5% of the specified quantity. The buyer objected to the offered evidence. Is the court likely to admit the evidence offered by the farmer? Answers:
A. No, because the offered evidence is inconsistent with the express language of the agreement.
B. No, because the written contract was totally integrated.
C. Yes, because the offered evidence demonstrates that the farmer substantially performed the contract.
D. Yes, because the offered evidence explains or supplements the agreement by usage of trade.