Western Refining Yorktown, Inc. v. BP Corp. North America 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 it was “not unreasonable to infer in Plaintiff’s favor that ‘f/k/a,’ when used in the caption identifying the plaintiff . . . , merely denotes a change in corporate name”
• denying motion to dismiss because “both parties have advanced reasonable interpretations of the ambiguous contract provisions, [and] extrinsic evidence not presently before the Court is necessary to resolve the ambiguity”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).