Smith v. Tinley

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that “an interpretation rendering a contract such that reasonable men would not enter into it is disfavored”
• refusing to apply Capo where “[t]he agreement . . . [was] far from 19 illegal”
• “[A]n interpretation rendering a contract such that reasonable men would not enter into it is disfavored.”
• “In addition, the ambiguities present in the agreement should be construed against Tinley since ambiguities in a contract are to be construed against the party who drafted it.”
• ambiguities in a contract are to be construed against party that drafted document
• applying canon against partner who drafted partnership agreement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).