NCP Lake Power, Inc. v. Florida Power Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that customary practices can “‘annex incidents to a written contract’ regarding matters to which the contract is silent”
• holding: “The interpretation of a contract is a question of law and, 3 See Fla. Std. J. Inst. (Civ.
• explaining extrinsic evidence may be admitted to explain technical terms in a contract that have a definite meaning among those dealing in certain commodities even if the contract is unambiguous
• explaining extrinsic evidence may be admitted to explain technical terms in a contract that have a definite meaning among those dealing in certain commodities even if the contract is unambiguous
• “As a general rule, when the terms and provisions of a contract are unambiguous and complete, parol evidence is not admissible to define or explain them.”
• “As a general rule when the terms and provisions of a contract are unambiguous and complete, parol evidence is not admissible to define or explain them.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).