Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 649 SO2D 1089 - Avis v. Anderson

Avis v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
December 1996
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 549 So. 2d 840 - Rosell v. Esco · 620 So. 2d 1331 - Liljeberg Enterprises, Inc. v. LIFEMARK HOSP. OF LA., INC.

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Although parol evidence is inadmissible to vary terms of a written contract, when the terms of a written contract are susceptible to more than one interpretation, or there is uncertainty or ambiguity as to its provisions, or the intent of the parties cannot be ascertained from the language employed, parol evidence is admissible to clarify the ambiguity and to show the intent of the parties.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “the words of a contract are clear and explicit and lead to no absurd consequences, no further interpretation may be made in search of the parties' intent”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “A doubtful [contract] provision must be interpreted in light of ... the conduct of the parties before and after the formation of the contract.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.