Coffill v. Coffill

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that it was error to rule that a purported scrivener’s error existed “without evidentiary hearing and evidentiary basis”
• rejecting defense of good faith reliance where document was “of no effect on its face, being limited by an expiration date long past before its purported exercise . . . and thus apparently worthless”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).