Opinion ID: 1801467
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Language of the Contracts

Text: Among other portions of the Contracts received in evidence that you are entitled to study and review in your deliberations, are portions of the Agency Contract designated as: Section C: Commissions Section K: On monthly statements Section L: On indebtedness owing to the Company To some extent the witnesses in this action have offered varying contentions to the construction of Contracts including the portions just designated. You should resolve any ambiguity in the Contracts by determining what the parties intended by the language used. In seeking the intent of the parties, you should consider the contract as a whole and the circumstances under which it was made. Language should be given its ordinary meaning unless it is clear that a special meaning was intended. The intent of the parties may also be gathered from conduct or dealings of the contracting parties showing that they construed the doubtful language in the same sense. We find no error. We have held on several occasions that an ambiguity exists when good arguments can be made both ways. [1] That is true here. It is certainly arguable that the contract implies a bar to objections not made within the year; on the other hand, it can be argued that no penalty is stated and none should be implied, and that the conduct of the parties is such that the jury could well conclude that no bar was intended. A jury question was presented.