Blue Cross v. McDevitt & Street Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reasoning that when the language of a form contract “arguably supports two antithetical interpretations,” courts will construe any ambiguity against the architect or contractor “who supplied [the] printed forms”
• stating that, although printed form contracts should be construed against the party who supplies them, “[t]he rule applies ... only when the contract is ambiguous on its face”
• stating that, although printed form contracts should be construed against the party who supplies them, “[t]he rule applies ... only when the contract is ambiguous on its face”
• “[A]mbiguous contracts must be construed strictly against the author.”
• both contractor and architect had insurable interests
• contract right or contract obligation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).