Pinkerton Tobacco Co. v. Melton
Supreme Court of Virginia
1DissentJustice Lacy
Where the language of an agreement is clear and capable of only one reasonable construction, a court must read the agreement according to its plain meaning, Paramount Termite Control Co. v. Rector, 238 Va. 171, 174, 380 S.E.2d 922, 925 (1989), and may not search for its meaning beyond the instrument itself. Management Enters., Inc. v. Thorncroft Co., 243 Va. 469, 472, 416 S.E.2d 229, 231 (1992). Because I do not agree that the majority’s construction of the relevant provision in the “Long-Term Incentive Plan” (Plan) is the only one reasonable, I respectfully dissent.
The relevant provision of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Paramount Termite Control Co. v. RectorSupreme Court of Virginia · 1989
- Management Enterprises, Inc. v. Thorncroft Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1992
- Cary v. Northwestern Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Virginia · 1920
- Enstar Corp. v. Bass, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1987
- Poindexter v. MoltonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1989