Oregon Supreme Court· 5/30/1997

Yogman v. Parrott

Citations

937 P.2d 1019
325 Or. 358
1997 Ore. LEXIS 44

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 second step is examination of extrinsic evidence, including “the parties’ practical construction of an agreement”
noting that whether a provision is ambiguous is a question of law
finding a restrictive covenant ambiguous because the text was susceptible to multiple interpretations
in the absence of ambi- guity, court construes the words of a contract as a matter of law
“residential purposes” and “commercial enterprise” are ambiguous given nature of actual use of the facilities
if contractual provision has only one plausible meaning, no further analysis is necessary

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Graber

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Yogman v. Parrott

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Yogman v. Parrott
Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1996-08-21· cited 2×

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.