TIMOTHY L. JACKSON v. STATE OF FLORIDA

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the 19 lower court erred in determining that contract term was ambiguous by failing to “use the whole 20 agreement to help interpret the words and phrases it found ambiguous”
• reversing the district court’s order compelling arbitration where the court failed to interpret an arbitration clause in the context of the contract as a whole
• “[T]the federal policy favoring 26 arbitration is no substitute for party agreement, or lack thereof.”
• the primary goal in 18 interpreting contracts under California law is “to give effect to the parties’ mutual intent gathered 19 from the entire document.”
• “[T]he intention of the parties is to be collected from the entire instrument and not detached portions thereof . . . .”
• “[L]anguage in a contract must be interpreted as a whole . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).