Sharon Bailey Snyder v. Donald Norman Snyder (Appeal from Shelby Circuit Court: DR-22-900095).

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that under the parol-evidence rule, extrinsic evidence is not admissible to interpret an unambiguous contract
• stating that a latent ambiguity exists when the language of a contract or deed is clear, but facts outside the contract create the “necessity for interpretation or a choice among two or more possible meanings.”
• reading the contract in light of the statute on which it relied to discern the meaning of the language
• third-party beneficiaries have the same right to enforce a contract “as they would if the promise had been directly to them.”
• “[I]f the language of a contract is unambiguous, it is to be construed according to its plain meaning.”
• “[I]f the language of a contract is unambiguous, it is to be construed according to its plain meaning.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).