With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". intended to purchase the entire 9.69 acre parcel described in the purchase and sale agreement. These findings have support in the record. Based on the evidence, the trial court could reasonably have been persuaded that it was highly probable that the parties operated under a mutual mistake as to the description in the deed. [¶ 18] Roger also argues that the doctrine of merger by deed prohibits reformation. “The doctrine of merger by deed provides that once a ... deed is accepted it becomes the final statement of the agreement between the parties and nullifies all provisions of the purchase-and-sale agreement.” Bryan, 665 A.2d at 1022 (quotation marks omitted). Merger by deed, however, does not prohibit reformation upon proof of a mutual mistake of fact at the time of closing. Cf. id. (<HOLDING>). C. Joint Accounts [¶ 19] Roger contends that

A: holding merger by deed prohibits reformation when one of the parties learns of a mistake before closing and still signs the deed
B: holding that because the purchase price typically is not included in the deed this term of the contract of sale is not merged with the deed
C: holding that a beneficiary under a deed of trust was entitled to reformation of the grantors deed
D: holding in part that party seeking reformation of deed must show the original intent or agreement of parties by clear and convincing evidence
A.