Bellish v. C. I. T. Corp.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
In the interest of brevity in this opinion, Steve Bellish, plaintiff, appellee herein, will.be designated as plaintiff, and the C. I. T. Corporation, defendant, appellant herein, as the defendant.
It is conceded that all of the written instruments executed by the parties to the transaction were pre ■pared either by the defendant or its assignor, Trinity Motors, Inc.
The well established rule in the interpretation of a written instrument is that in case of ambiguity the document is construed most strongly against the' person who prepared it and most favorably to the person who had no voice in…
2Cited by14 opinions
- G. F. Business Equipment, Inc. v. ListonOhio Court of Appeals · 1982
- Lathrop Co. v. City of ToledoOhio Supreme Court · 1966
- Oberan v. Western MacHinery Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1946
- General Tire, Inc. v. MehlfeldtOhio Court of Appeals · 1997
- Dayton Fabricated Steel Co. v. Dayton Town & Country, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1954
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.