Gateway Development/East Lyme, LLC v. Duong, 227 Conn. App. 38 (2024)

Citation: Gateway Development/East Lyme, LLC v. Duong, 227 Conn. App. 38 (2024)
Parent Document: Gateway Development/East Lyme, LLC v. Duong, 227 Conn. App. 38 (2024)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2024-07-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10131818/gateway-developmenteast-lyme-l... ↗

Full Text

2,295 chars

plenary].’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Carroll v.
         Yankwitt, 203 Conn. App. 449, 487, 250 A.3d 696 (2021).
            ‘‘The intent of the parties as expressed in [writing]
         is determined from the language used interpreted in
         the light of the situation of the parties and the circum-
         stances connected with the transaction. . . . [T]he
         intent of the parties is to be ascertained by a fair and
         reasonable construction of the written words and . . .
         the language used must be accorded its common, natu-
         ral, and ordinary meaning and usage where it can be
         sensibly applied to the subject matter of the [writing].’’
         (Internal quotation marks omitted.) 19 Perry Street,
         LLC v. Unionville Water Co., 294 Conn. 611, 623, 987
         A.2d 1009 (2010).
            ‘‘Where the language of the [writing] is clear and
         unambiguous, the [writing] is to be given effect accord-
         ing to its terms.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.)
         Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. 50 Morgan Hospitality
         Group, LLC, 211 Conn. App. 724, 731, 273 A.3d 726
         (2022); see also Bellini v. Patterson Oil Co., 156 Conn.
         App. 158, 163, 111 A.3d 987 (2015) (‘‘[w]hen only one
         interpretation of a contract is possible, the court need
         not look outside the four corners of the contract’’ (inter-
         nal quotation marks omitted)). ‘‘If, however, the con-
         tractual language is found to be ambiguous, [s]uch
         ambiguity permits the trial court’s consideration of
         extrinsic evidence as to the conduct of the parties.’’
         (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Heyman Associ-
         ates No. 5, L.P. v. FelCor TRS Guarantor, L.P., 153
         Conn. App. 387, 403, 102 A.3d 87, cert. denied, 315 Conn.
         901, 104 A.3d 106 (2014).
           An agreement is ambiguous ‘‘[w]here the language
         of [that] agreement is susceptible to more than one
         reasonable interpretation . . . .’’ (Internal quotation
         marks omitted.) Cody Real Estate, LLC v. G & H Cater-
         ing, Inc., 219 Conn. App. 773, 784, 296 A.3d 214, cert.
0, 0                    CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                       Page 9

Other Sections in This Document (42)

Full Text