Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Crow v. Crow's Sports Center, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Mississippi
Decided November 13, 2012No. 2011-CA-01233-COAPublished
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRussell, J.
¶ 17. I agree with the majority that the option-to-purchase provision of the contract is enforceable because there was a method for determining the purchase price. But I would simply affirm the chancery court’s order, instead of reversing and remanding for further consideration, because the four corners of the contract are clear and unambiguous.
¶ 18. “Questions concerning the construction of contracts are questions of law that are committed to the court rather than questions of fact committed to the fact-finder.” Belager-Price v. Lingle, 28 So.3d 706, 710 (¶ 7) (Miss.Ct.App.2010) (quoting…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- ROYER HOMES OF MS., INC. v. Chandeleur Homes, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 2003
- Parkerson v. SmithMississippi Supreme Court · 2002
- Leach v. TingleMississippi Supreme Court · 1991
- Duke v. WhatleyMississippi Supreme Court · 1991
- Hunt v. CokerCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 1999
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.