Supreme Court of Connecticut· 6/23/2009

Isham v. Isham

Citations

972 A.2d 228
292 Conn. 170
2009 Conn. LEXIS 149

How courts have described this case

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

“proper inquiry focuses on whether the agreement on its face is reasonably susceptible of more than one interpretation”
“proper inquiry focuses on whether the agreement on its face is reasonably susceptible of more than one interpretation”
“When the language of a contract is ambiguous, the determination of the parties’ intent is a question of fact.”
“Contract language is unambiguous when it has a definite and precise meaning . . . concerning which there is no reasonable basis for a difference of opinion” [internal quotation marks omitted]
where language in separation agreement is clear and unambiguous, contract must be given effect according to its terms and determination of intent of parties is question of law
trial court improperly excluded testimony from parties ‘‘with respect to their intent at the time of the formation of the agreement,’’ given this court’s conclusion that sepa- ration agreement was ambiguous as to meaning of term ‘‘salary’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rogers, Norcott, Katz, Vertefeuille, Zarella

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

31 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Isham v. Isham

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.