In may, a cafe owner entered into a written agreement with a general contractor to build a cafe on the cafe owner's land by the following April for $2,000,000. During construction, the cafe owner realized that it would be too expensive to maintain the building if it were built as originally planned. The parties orally agreed to reduce the size of the cafe and to reduce the cafe owner's payment to $1,800,000. The contractor completed the cafe and demanded $1,800,000. However, the cafe owner refused to pay that amount claiming that the reduction in the cafe's size was a breach of the original contract entitling her to damages, which would significantly reduce the amount owed on the contract by more than $200,000. If the contractor sues, who will prevail?
(A) The contractor, because the oral modification is enforceable.
(B) The contractor, because the court can determine the value of his services in quantum meruit.
(C) The cafe owner, because the oral modification is unenforceable pursuant to the Statute of Frauds.
(D) The cafe owner, because the oral modification is unenforceable to the parol evidence rule