C & G, INC. v. Rule

How courts have described this case

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

• declining to find an easement because the words “right of way” appeared only on the cover page \instead of being found in the granting or habendum clauses\
• “Accordingly, because the words ‘right of way’ appear only on the cover pages of the Thomas and Chaney deeds instead of being found in the granting or habendum clauses,____”
• “Interpretation of an ambiguous document presents a question of fact, and we will defer to the findings of the trial court so long as those findings are supported by substantial and competent evidence.”
• “In addition, there is no language in either of the deeds indicating that the grantors intended any type of reversionary interest in the properties such as a right of re-entry or possibility of reverter.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).