Topic: if possible, a court should interpret a contract so that al… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #433

7 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 443 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Whirlpool Corp. v. Ziebert.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 Whirlpool Corp. v. Ziebert Anchor
wis · 1995
green “if possible, a court should interpret a contract so that all parts are given meaning.” 65
2 American States Insurance Co. v. Kiger
ind · 1996
green “rather than place them in con- flict.” 63
3 Travelers Indemnity Co. of America v. Moore & Associates, Inc.
tenn · 2007
green “an insurance contract must be interpreted fairly and reasonably, giving the lan- guage its usual and ordinary meaning.” 63
4 Olmsted Medical Center v. Continental Casualty Company
ca8 · 2023
green “effect on the underly- ing property.” 63
5 Olmsted Medical Center v. Continental Casualty Company
ca8 · 2023
green “were permanent absent some intervention.” 63
6 Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. v. Ace American Insurance Company
vt · 2022
green “means persistent destruction or deprivation, in whole or in part, with a causal nexus to a physical event or condition.” 63
7 Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. v. Ace American Insurance Company
vt · 2022
green “a distinct, demonstrable, physical change to property.” 63

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check