Jahnke v. Tiemersma

How courts have described this case

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

• “Under New York law the initial interpretation of a contract is a matter of law for the court to decide[.]” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
• “[O]nly where the court finds that the terms are unambiguous, or where no extrinsic evidence exists, may it properly grant summary judgment to one of the parties.”
• “Ambiguity 11 with respect to the meaning of contract terms can arise either from the language itself or from 12 inferences that can be drawn from this language.”
• “If the court finds that the contract is not ambiguous it should assign the plain and ordinary meaning to each term and interpret the contract without the aid of extrinsic evidence.”
• where no extrinsic evidence exists, court may grant summary judgment
• “If the court finds that the terms, or the inferences readily drawn from the terms, are ambiguous, then the court may accept any available extrinsic evidence to ascertain the meaning intended by the parties during the formation of the contract,”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).