We review de novo an interpretation of a marital settlement agreement and a determination of whether the agreement's terms are ambiguous. In re Marriage of Dundas, 355 Ill.App.3d 423, 426, 291 Ill.Dec. 229, 823 N.E.2d 239 (2005); In re Marriage of Wassom, 352 Ill.App.3d 327, 330, 287 Ill.Dec. 448, 815 N.E.2d 1251 (2004). ¶ 18 Terry and Sue undoubtedly contracted for maintenance. Our analysis, however, hinges not on how the parties labeled the award, but what they actually intended for it to be. “When the terms of a settlement agreement are susceptible to two different interpretations, the court must apply the interpretation that establishes the rational and probable agreement.”

¶ 19 When interpreting a PSA, courts seek to give effect to the parties' intent. In re Marriage of Dundas , 355 Ill. App. 3d 423, 425-26, 291 Ill.Dec. 229, 823 N.E.2d 239 (2005). When the terms of an agreement are unambiguous, intent must be determined solely from the agreement's language.

We agree with petitioner. ¶ 16 The rules of contract construction are also applicable to the interpretation of a marital settlement agreement. In re Marriage of Dundas, 355 Ill. App. 3d 423, 425, 823 N.E.2d 239, 241 (2005). A court's primary objective is to give effect to the intent of the parties.

When interpreting a marital settlement, courts seek to give effect to the parties' intent. In re Marriage of Dundas, 355 Ill. App. 3d 423, 425-26, 823 N.E.2d 239, 241 (2005). "The language used in the marital agreement generally is the best indication of the parties' intent."

Interpreting a marital settlement agreement is a matter of contract construction. In re Marriage of Dundas, 355 Ill. App. 3d 423, 823 N.E.2d 239 (2005). We seek to effectuate the parties' intent at the time the agreement was executed.

See Blum, 235 Ill. 2d at 36. ¶ 21 With those principles in mind, we now turn to an examination of the parties' MSA. "Interpreting a marital settlement agreement is a matter of contract construction." In re Marriage of Dundas, 355 Ill. App. 3d 423, 425 (2005). "As such, courts seek to give effect to the parties' intent."

¶ 24 The normal rules of contract construction apply when construing a marital settlement agreement. In re Marriage of Dundas, 355 Ill. App. 3d 423, 425, 823 N.E.2d 239, 241 (2005). When interpreting a contract or marital settlement agreement, a court's primary objective is to give effect to the intent of the parties.

In re Marriage of Culp, 399 Ill. App. 3d 542, 547, 936 N.E.2d 1040, 1045 (2010); In re Marriageof Dundas, 355 Ill. App. 3d 423, 426, 823 N.E.2d 239, 241 (2005) (the language used in the marital settlement agreement is generally the best indication of the parties' intent). We review de novo the interpretation of a marital settlement agreement.

When an agreement is ambiguous, the court may hear parol evidence to decide the parties' intent. In re Marriage of Dundas, 355 Ill. App. 3d 423, 426 (2005). An ambiguity exists where the language of an agreement is susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation.

See Daley, 146 Ill. 2d at 27. ¶ 11 Turning to the merits of this appeal, "[i]nterpreting a[n MSA] is a matter of contract construction." In re Marriage of Dundas, 355 Ill. App. 3d 423, 425 (2005). "As such, courts seek to give effect to the parties' intent."