Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Abushanab v. St. Charles Gaming Co.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided November 7, 2012No. 12-155Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partKeaty, J.

|,I respectfully dissent from the majority’s affirmance of the trial court’s judgment. The following rules found in the Louisiana Civil Code regarding interpretation of contracts are applicable here.1 “Interpretation of a contract is the determination of the common intent of the parties.” La.Civ.Code art. 2045. “When the words of a contract are clear and explicit and lead to no absurd consequences, no further interpretation may be made in search of the parties’ intent.” La.Civ.Code art. 2046. “The words of a contract must be given their generally prevailing meaning.” La.Civ.Code art. art.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Leake v. ParsonLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1925
  2. Teague v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2009
  3. Crawford v. United Service Auto. Ass'nLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API