Mattox v. Cassady

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the court has a duty to ascertain the intent of the parties when the language of a settlement agreement is susceptible of more than one interpretation
• where property settlement agreement incorporated into divorce decree is ambiguous, court may consider parol evidence to ascertain intent of parties
• “Like any other agreement, when the language of a settlement agreement is susceptible of more than one interpretation, it is the duty of the court to ascertain the intentions of the parties.”
• “Like any other agreement, when the language of a settlement agreement [incorporated into a divorce decree] is susceptible of more than one interpretation, it is the duty of the court to ascertain the intentions of the parties.”
• in determining the meaning of a settlement agreement incorporated into a divorce decree, the Court of Appeals held it is the duty of the court to ascertain the intention of the parties when the language of a settlement agreement is susceptible of more than one interpretation
• in determining the meaning of a settlement agreement incorporated into a divorce decree, the Court of Appeals held it is the duty of the court to ascertain the intention of the parties when the language of a settlement agreement is susceptible of more than one interpretation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).