Havens v. Safeway Stores

How courts have described this case

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

• saying that it is not for the court to reform an instrument by rejecting words of clear and definite meaning
• explaining that “custom and usage may be shown to elucidate or explain something ambiguous about a contract” but declining to invoke this principle where the contract language was “clear and definite” (quotation cleaned up)
• “Interest at a rate of 12.00% per annum shall be paid to the Registered Holder hereof quarterly.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).