Skip to main content

Oliver v. Oliver

Citations

  • 19 S.W.3d 630
  • 70 Ark. App. 403
  • 24 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2942
  • 2000 Ark. App. LEXIS 471

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that a latent ambiguity may arise when, although an asset’s description appears clear on its face, “it turns out that there is more than one [asset] to which the description applies”
  • “When a contract is unambiguous, its construction is a question of law for the court, and the intent of the parties is not relevant.”
  • “When a contract is unambiguous, its construction is a question of law for the court, and the intent of the parties is not relevant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: K. Max Koonce

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.