Pylant v. Spivey

How courts have described this case

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

• restating holding in earlier case that agreement to pay for “college” not limited to public college and that “the ordinary meaning of the term ‘college’ include[s] private as well as public colleges”
• “Whether the term „reasonable‟ is written into the contract by the parties or is implied into it by the courts, „reasonable‟ does not mean unlimited.”
• the “[Tennessee appellate] court has consistently held that [an agreement to pay for college] is subject to an implied condition of reasonableness, at least where no specific college or amount of expenses is set forth”
• “Courts must avoid rewriting an agreement under the guise of interpreting it.”
• “The fact that an agreement does not set a specific amount or otherwise identify a measurable limit does not mean that the obligation is unlimited or that the child can unilaterally obligate the parent to pay an unreasonable amount.”
• father’s contractual obligation to pay for daughter’s college education

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).