Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 40 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 Rasheed v. Chrysler Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rasheed v. Chrysler Corp. Anchor | green | “the primary goal in the construction or interpretation of any contract is to honor the intent of the parties.” | 25 |
| 2 | Rasheed v. Chrysler Corp. | green | “honor the intent of the parties,” | 6 |
| 3 | Michigan Chandelier Co. v. Morse | green | “must look for the intent of the parties in the words used in the instrument.” | 5 |
| 4 | Brock v. Scheuner Corporation | green | “the court must enforce the settlement as agreed to by the parties and is not permitted to alter the terms of the agreement.” | 4 |
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.