Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lester v. Scarbrough

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided April 21, 1995No. 2940009Published

1DissentCrawley, Judge

As the majority observes, “[wjhether an agreement is ambiguous is a question of law to be determined by the trial court.” I dissent because I believe the trial court erred by finding this agreement to be ambiguous and by allowing parol testimony concerning the intent of the parties.

“As a general rule, where the terms of an agreement between divorcing parties is doubtful or the language of the agreement is ambiguous, the court may allow testimony regarding precontract negotiations as well as the understanding of the parties. Lowe v. Lowe, 495 So.2d 1123 (Ala.Civ. App.1986). However, if the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ex Parte CashSupreme Court of Alabama · 1993
  2. PACIFIC ENT. OIL v. Howell PetroleumSupreme Court of Alabama · 1993
  3. Southern Cafeteria Operating Company, Inc. v. EleyCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1974
  4. Lowe v. LoweCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API