More details to this question:
The first paragraph of a contract I was presented with by the seller of a horse identifies by name the seller and myself, by name, as the buyer and then states whereby title of a specific horse will be transferred from the seller to the buyer. On the second page of the contract there is a line that states "seller: with the sellers name typed. A second line states" buyer" and my name and her name is typed. The signature lines at the bottom of the contract do not identify either party as seller or buyer. I believe I own title to this horse and the other person believes they own half. How should this be interpereted?
2 ANSWERS
Real Property Attorney serving Bethesda, MD
at
The Morris Law Firm, LLC
Update Your Profile
Mr. Robins gives a very thorough answer regarding how contracts are generally interpreted and construed where these matters are resolved by a court in litigation. Your takeaway should be that the answer to your question is largely "it all depends." It all depends on: the actual language of the contract; whether there in ambiguity in that langauge (as it appears there is); whether language in one part of the contract resolves the ambiguity as to who was the "purchaser"; whether there are any other communications between you and the other party (e.g. emails) that could resolve any ambiguity in that language; etc.
An experienced contract lawyer may be able to review the contract and assist you in resolving this dispute without litigation, which is nearly always the preferable outcome. But, without reviewing the contract itself, it is impossible to determine how it would be interpreted. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any further questions.
Good luck,Sean Morris
Answered on Sep 30th, 2013 at 2:12 PM
Contracts are interpreted to reflect the intent of the parties. In written contracts, this intent is established according to the words written on the page, but if the writing is ambiguous (from what you've writen it seems to be ambiguous here), a Court will determine how the contract should be interpreted based on each party's testimony and other evidence provided by the parties. For example, if you paid $10,000, and an expert testifies that the horse was worth between $8000 and $12,000, this will tend to show the Court that the parties intended that the entire horse be sold to you, because who would pay $10,000 for half of a horse worth only $10,000.
There are also some general rules to guide construction. For example, one rule is that if there is an ambiguity, the words should be interpreted against the person who drafted the agreement. Another such rule is that, where written words conflict with printed words, the written words control.
It is also possible (but rare) that a Court could find that the parties never reached a "meeting of the minds" because they each thought their agreement meant different things, and therefore rescind the contract, meaning that the seller would have to pay you back what you paid (probably with interest), and would retain full ownership of the horse.
Answered on Sep 30th, 2013 at 1:01 PM