Hansen v. Ford Motor Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “a general release raises a rebuttable presumption that only those persons specifically designated by name or by some other specific identifying terminology are discharged”
• determining that a party’s statements of unilateral, 13 subjective intent, without more, are insufficient to establish ambiguity in light of clear 14 contract language
• observing that releases are generally interpreted using contract law
• “‘[T]he question of mutual mistake is determined not by self-serving subjective statements of the parties’ intent’ . . . but, instead by objective manifestations of the parties’ intent.”
• deriving this statement from Mark V and C.R. Anthony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).