JEFF SCOTT v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that ambiguity “is not created simply because a controversy exists between parties, each favoring an interpretation contrary to the other’s” (citation omitted)
• noting that “extrinsic evidence may be used as an interpretive guide only after the judge or the court determines that the contract is ambiguous on its face or as applied”
• computing prejudgment interest based on approximate dates of payments, rather than “from the date of commencement of the action or from the date of the breach”
• approving trial court’s use of an “approximation [that] avoided using the . . . different dates of accrual that would have been required for a more precise calculation”
• court must “examine the language of the contract by itself, independent of extrinsic evidence concerning the drafting history or the intention of the parties”
• \extrinsic evidence may be used as an interpretive guide only after the judge or the court determines that the contract is ambiguous\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).