Friendswood Development Co. v. McDade + Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding only after contract is found to be ambiguous may parol evidence be admitted for purpose of ascertaining parties' true intentions
• holding only after contract is found to be ambiguous may parol evidence be admitted for purpose of ascertaining parties’ true intentions
• stating that when a contract is ambiguous the factfinder may look to extrinsic evidence to ascertain the true intentions of the parties
• noting that defendant may assert defense of “justification,” by demonstrating that the alleged interference was merely an exercise of its own superior or equal legal rights, or a good-faith claim to a colorable albeit mistaken legal right
• holding whether a contract is unambiguous is a question of law
• affirming summary judgment on contract claim and finding that extrinsic evidence of parties' subjective intent is immaterial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).