I think this clause is a worth a try.  

Just one nitpicky thing - I would have thought the correct word would be 
"parol" - not "parole".

S
---------------------- Forwarded by Shari Stack/HOU/ECT on 01/31/2000 09:36 
AM ---------------------------


Sara Shackleton
01/31/2000 09:30 AM
To: Carol St Clair/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shari Stack/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark 
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Re: Admissability of tapes into evidence

Could this be an alternative to our recording issue?
---------------------- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 01/31/2000 
08:53 AM ---------------------------


Richard B Sanders
01/31/2000 04:59 AM
To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:  
Subject: Re: Admissability of tapes into evidence  

In theory, there may be some jurisdictions that do not allow tapes to be 
admissable because of issues other than relevance--such as authenticity. It 
is hard to know the Evidence Rules of every jurisdiction. I would suggest the 
following language:

The parties to this Agreement agree that any such recording are admissable in 
any legal proceeding for any matters relevant to the Agreement, except for 
those recordings that violate the Parole Evidence Rule of the applicable 
jurisdiction.