Brown v. Beckwith

Citations

• 60 Fla. 310

Syllabus

<p>1. In construing a contract the leading object is to ascertain and effectuate the intention of the parties. To ascertain the real intent, the language used, the subject-matter and the purpose designed may be considered.</p> <p>2. When the purpose designed to be accomplished by a contract is ascertained, the meaning and effect given to the language used should comport with the intended purpose.</p> <p>3. While ambiguous language is to be construed against the person using it, yet it should be given the meaning and effect that will be in accord with the object in view.</p> <p>4. The real intention as disclosed by a fair consideration of all parts of a contract should control the meaning of mere words when the words have reference to the main purpose.</p> <p>5. Where the main purpose of a contract is for the conveyance of timbered land subject to a reservation of “the right to box, chip and turpentine all of said lands for a period of four years from the date of the boxing of the same,” and to limit the time within which the boxing should be done and the time beyond which the trees should not be used at all by the vendor, subsequent agreements extending the time “within which to complete said turpentine operations” and “to work said timber,” and “for boxing and working the timber,” have reference to the ultimate expiration of the reservation, and do not affect the original provision that the turpentining of trees shall cease “four years from the date of the boxing of the same,” where a contrary intent does not clearly appear.</p>