holding that "the best evidence of what parties to a written agreement intend is what they say in their writing"
Summary of this case from Youngman v. Yucaipa Am. All. Fund I, L.P. (In re Ashinc Corp.)Submitted April 13, 1992
Decided May 5, 1992
Motion for reargument of motion for leave to appeal denied. Cross motion for imposition of sanctions denied.
Judge HANCOCK, JR., taking no part.
holding that "the best evidence of what parties to a written agreement intend is what they say in their writing"
Summary of this case from Youngman v. Yucaipa Am. All. Fund I, L.P. (In re Ashinc Corp.)finding that standard contract clauses should be enforced as written
Summary of this case from In re Smurfit-Stone Container Corporationfinding that standard contract clauses should be enforced as written
Summary of this case from In re Smurfit-Stone Container Corp.stating that "[t]he best evidence of what parties to a written agreement intend is what they say in their writing"
Summary of this case from Advanced Water Techs. v. Amiad U.S.A., Inc.stating that "the best evidence of what parties to a written agreement intend is what they say in their writing"
Summary of this case from Lake Express, LLC v. Austal USA, LLCFull title:JOHN F. COUGHLIN, SR., et al., Appellants, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et…
Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Date published: May 5, 1992
New York courts further instruct that, "[t]he best evidence of what parties to a written agreement intend is…
In re Smurfit-Stone Container Corp.New York courts further instruct that, “[t]he best evidence of what parties to a written agreement intend is…