Opinion ID: 1862465
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: instruction on construction of contract

Text: Finally, the Warwicks complain of Instruction P-26: INSTRUCTION P-26 The Court instructs you that to the extent that the Agreement For Issuance and Purchase of Corporate Shares entered into by and between the Plaintiff and Defendants is susceptible to two constructions, the agreement is to be construed most strongly or strictly against the party who drafted the contract; the Defendants. While this instruction is a correct statement of the law, Kight v. Sheppard Bldg. Supply Co., 537 So.2d 1355, 1358 (Miss. 1989); Mississippi State Highway Comm'n v. Dixie Contractors, Inc., 375 So.2d 1202 (Miss. 1979), it should not have been given because ordinarily the construction to be given words in a contract is first a matter for determination by the court. Palmer v. Fuqua, 641 F.2d 1146 (5th Cir.1981); Nat Harrison Assoc., Inc. v. Gulf States Utilities Co., 491 F.2d 578 (5th Cir.1974); Union Planters Corp. v. Harwell, 578 S.W.2d 87 (Tenn. App. 1978); Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. Cain, 519 S.W.2d 528 (Tex.Civ.App. 1974); 17A C.J.S. Contracts, § 616. Also, the instruction is abstract. In view of the multitude of instructions which were given, however, we see no reversible error in the granting of this instruction.