C. & A. Construction Co. v. Benning Construction Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1DissentJohn A. Fogleman, Justice
The majority opinion is apparently based upon the premise that the existence of ambiguity must be determined by the court upon the basis of an examination of the contract. This is the case in determining whether there is a patent ambiguity. It is not in the case of a latent ambiguity. By definition, a latent ambiguity is one which does not appear upon the face of the instrument and cannot be detected by examination of the document. It arises from facts not disclosed in the instrument. Dorr v. School District No. 26, 40 Ark. 237. Latent ambiguity is defined at 3A C.J.S. P. 409, Ambiguity, as…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Easton v. Washington County InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
- McCarty C. Mercury Metalcraft Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1964
- Hall v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United StatesMichigan Supreme Court · 1940
- Logan v. WileySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Wood v. KelseySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.