Skip to main content

Smith v. Smith

Citations

  • 351 S.E.2d 593
  • 3 Va. App. 510
  • 3 Va. Law Rep. 1501
  • 1986 Va. App. LEXIS 390

How courts have described this case

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

  • “[W]e are not bound by the trial court’s conclusions as to the construction of the disputed provisions.”
  • ‘When the terms of a disputed provision are clear and definite, it is axiomatic that they are to be applied according to their ordinary meaning____”
  • “Where there is no ambiguity in the terms of a contract, we must construe it as written.”
  • “We are not bound by the trial court’s conclusions as to the construction of the disputed provisions.”
  • “Where there is no ambiguity in the terms of a contract, we must construe it as written.”
  • “Where there is no ambiguity in the terms of a contract, we must construe it as written, and we are not at liberty to search for the meaning of the provisions beyond the pertinent instrument itself.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Benton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

44 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

14 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.