Petrocelli v. McGoldrick

How courts have described this case

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

• ”[W]here a question of intention is determinable by written agreements, the question is one of law.”
• where parties’ intent is “determinable by written agreements, the question [of intent] is one of law” appropriate for resolution on a motion for summary judgment
• “Only where the intent must be determined by disputed evidence or inferences outside the written words of the instrument is a question of fact presented.”
• “Only where discussed the claim for breach of contract under New York law. . . . The Court ‘follow[s] their lead’ and applies New York law here.” (citations omitted)
• a clause explicitly naming the prior contract to be superseded was sufficiently definitive
• “The courts have declared on countless occasions that it is the responsibility of the court to interpret written instruments. The problem of analysis of the instrument is to determine what is the intention of the parties as derived from the language employed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).