Tyson v. McPhail Properties, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the contract “would not have used two different terms in two sequential paragraphs to describe the same thing”
• holding that a party could not prevail on its affirmative defense of rescission where it offered no evidence as to how it was damaged by the alleged misrepresentations of the other party
• holding that a party could not prevail on its affirmative defense of rescission where it offered no evidence as to how it was damaged by the alleged misrepresentations of the other party
• finding that the contract “would not have used two different terms in two sequential paragraphs to describe the same thing”
• resolving ambiguity in insurance contract under rule of construction that contract “would not have used two different terms in two sequential paragraphs to describe the same thing”
• recitation of nominal consideration of $10 in option agreement signed under seal was sufficient as matter of law to support agreement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).