The cable television was unpaid for the months of January, February, March and June of 1996 and June, July and August, 1997. He paid 9 months, so in fact, he got 3 months free. Judgment was entered accordingly, and Baltrusch appealed. The construction of the language of a written contract to determine the legal effect is a question of law for the court to decide. Olson v. Souris River Telecomms.
Questions of law are fully reviewable.
Ridley v. Metropolitan Fed. Whether the 1992 agreement replaced the 1991 agreement, or was merely an addendum to the 1991 agreement, the question of whether or not Baltrusch's landlord could collect from him a fee for cable television in addition to the rent specified in the housing assistance payments contract is governed by paragraphs 4 and 9 of the 1992 agreement. The tenant rent as determined by the PHA is the maximum amount the Landlord can require the Tenant to pay as rent for the dwelling unit, including all services, maintenance and utilities to be provided by the Landlord in accordance with this Lease. The judgment is affirmed. Haugstad claims it was an oral agreement.