Here we go again. You might recall that syntactic ambiguity involves uncertainty over what part of a sentence a phrase modifies, or what part of a phrase a word modifies. If you want a whole bunch of examples of syntactic ambiguity, just search for “syntactic” on this blog. Well, the most recent Supreme Court opinion, Lockhart v. U.S. (opinion PDF … Read More
We’ve had occasion to explore the risk you run when a contract refers to itself in confusing ways. See this post about herein; see this post about hereunder; see this post about except as provided below. Well, if a lesson is worth learning three times, it’s worth learning yet again. So thanks to relentless lead generator Steven Sholk, I present you, … Read More
If you’ve been reading this blog for a while, you probably don’t need any further warnings about confusion caused by commas. Well, you’re getting one anyway. A reader told me about this post on the blog of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. It’s about last fall’s Ninth Circuit opinion in Hamdan. It involves the language of a statute, not a contract, but … Read More
In this May 2014 post I wrote about a potential fight over an “and” in an indenture of Caesars Entertainment. Well, we now have an actual fight. For a summary of the current state of play, see this post on Language Log.
One interesting tidbit in the Tim Cummins post I discuss in this post is his reference to a court opinion involving a dispute over meaning of the word “new”. It’s Reliable Contracting Grp., LLC v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 779 F.3d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (PDF copy here). The issue in that case was whether generators that had never been … Read More
Today I saw this post by Francis Pileggi on the Delaware Corporate & Commercial Litigation Blog. It’s about the recent opinion of the Delaware Court of Chancery in Cyber Holding LLC v. CyberCore Holding, Inc. (PDF here). Cyber Holding LLC (“Seller”) sold CyberCore Corporation (the “Company”) to CyberCore Holding, Inc. (“Buyer”) (what an imaginative bunch of names) in a transaction that closed in … Read More
Via D.C. Toedt, I learned of the Second Circuit’s decision in Lloyd v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (here), decided yesterday. This case involved J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.’s appeal of a lower-court ruling denying their motion to compel arbitration. The Second Circuit affirmed, holding that the lower court had correctly read the arbitration agreement to incorporate the rules of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority … Read More
This morning I saw the following tweet by @section_sign: https://twitter.com/section_sign/status/609300513239085058 No, I haven’t suddenly acquired an active interest in the politics of bicycling. Instead, I spotted ambiguity. Here’s a sentence from a benefit plan that exhibits the same ambiguity: If every member of the Committee does not meet the definition of “outside director” as defined in Code (S)162(m), … That conveys two … Read More
Longtime readers will know that I have no time for the notion of “tested” contract language—instead of continuing to use confusing contract language because a court has had occasion to attribute meaning to it, I prefer to state meaning clearly. So instead of relying on caselaw to tell me how to draft contracts, I find caselaw mostly useful for the … Read More
What, you want another example of a court mishandling its analysis of potential ambiguity? My SuperGuide post (here) wasn’t enough for you? OK, if you insist … Reader Zach Courson alerted me to a recent opinion of the North Carolina Business Court, Medfusion, Inc. v. Allscripts Healthcare Solutions, Inc., No. 14 CVS 5192, 2015 WL 1455680 (N.C. Super. Mar. 31, 2015) (PDF copy here). … Read More
