7 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 57 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 Bogle Farms, Inc. v. Baca.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bogle Farms, Inc. v. Baca Anchor | green | “the role of the court is to give effect to the intention of the contracting parties.” | 10 |
| 2 | Mark V, Inc. v. Mellekas | green | “an ambiguity exists in an agreement when the parties' expressions of mutual assent lack clarity.” | 10 |
| 3 | Bogle Farms, Inc. v. Baca | green | “the primary objective in construing a contract is not to label it with specific definitions or to look at form above substance, but to ascertain and enforce the intent of the parties as shown by the contents of the instrument.” | 9 |
| 4 | Mark V, Inc. v. Mellekas | green | “reasonably and fairly susceptible of different constructions, an ambiguity exists.” | 9 |
| 5 | C.R. Anthony Co. v. Loretto Mall Partners | green | “evidence will be admitted to aid in interpreting the parties' expressions.” | 7 |
| 6 | Memorial Medical Center, Inc. v. Tatsch Construction, Inc. | green | “the parol evidence rule 'bars admission of evidence extrinsic to the contract to contradict and perhaps even supplement the writing.” | 7 |
| 7 | Mark V, Inc. v. Mellekas | green | “new mexico law, then, allows the court to consider extrinsic evidence to make a preliminary finding on the question of ambiguity.” | 5 |
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.