Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Unraveling Plain Meaning, Extrinsic Evidence And the Doctrine of Contra Proferentem
As anyone involved with insurance coverage litigation knows, ” contra proferentem” is Latin for “ the insurer loses.” Contra proferentem is a rule of contract interpretation that requires an ambiguous contract term to be construed against the drafter of the contract. 20-129 Appleman on Insurance Law & Practice Archive ' 129.2. Because the insurer is the author or “profferor” of the insurance contract, contra proferentem, when applied, almost always results in a loss for the insurer. That the doctrine is also called the “contra insurer” rule speaks to the fact that, when interpreting insurance policies, courts sometimes forget that general rules of contract construction still apply. But there may be a trend in the right direction.
Specifically, a number of commentators have identified a trend away from strict application of contra proferentem and the “plain meaning rule” and toward the admission of extrinsic evidence, in some states even where a contract is ostensibly unambiguous. This is based on a recognition of the inherent tension between these two rules on one hand, and, on the other hand, the principle that ascertaining the parties' intent in the formation of contract is paramount. The view that extrinsic evidence shall not be considered to resolve ambiguities in a contract is clearly at odds with the goal of ascertaining the parties' intent. This is essentially the view in those states applying the contra proferentem rule as a first resort in cases of ambiguity. The preclusion of extrinsic evidence to answer the question of whether an ambiguity exists in the first instance is also at odds with the goal of ascertaining the parties' intent.
Beach Boys Songs Written Decades Ago Triggered Current Quarrel With Lawyers
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Transfer Tax Implications on Real Property Leases
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.