Mellon Bank, N.A. v. Aetna Business Credit, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a court’s determination that a contract term is clear or ambiguous is a matter of law
• stating that where, as here, writings are ambiguous, they are “to be interpreted by the fact finder. . . .”
• stating that where, as here, a writing is ambiguous, it is “to be interpreted by the fact finder. . . .”
• asserting that “Pennsylvania cases dealing with the burden of proving a condition precedent [ ] suggest that the burden of proof to establish the condition is on the party alleging the breach”
• noting that “the words [that parties] use in their written contract” govern
• rejecting extrinsic evidence that showed that one party to a disputed contract thought it bore some risk of borrower's default as insufficient to vary the clear meaning of the term \insolvent\ as used in the contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).