Opinion ID: 2219131
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Interpretation of The Release Agreement in This Case

Text: The release document in this case cannot be said to be clear and unambiguous on its face. It is entitled General Release. The first paragraph names only the IHSAA, its employees, agents, and assigns as the person being released from any and all claims, demands, damage actions, causes of action or suits of any kind. The second paragraph states that the terms of the settlement have been accepted for the purpose of making a full and final compromise, adjustment and settlement of any and all claims, disputes, or otherwise, and for the express purpose of precluding forever any further or additional claims arising out of the aforesaid. These contradictory references cloud the intent of the document. Consequently, parol evidence may be utilized to determine the parties' true intentions respecting the document's application. Thomas v. Thomas (1991), Ind., 577 N.E.2d 216, 220; Boswell v. Lyon (1980), Ind. App., 401 N.E.2d 735, 740. This, of course, necessitates that the entry of summary judgment be reversed and the case remanded for such a factual determination.