Zenon v. R. E. Yeagher Management Corp., 57 Conn. App. 316 (2000)

Citation: Zenon v. R. E. Yeagher Management Corp., 57 Conn. App. 316 (2000)
Parent Document: Zenon v. R. E. Yeagher Management Corp., 57 Conn. App. 316 (2000)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2000-04-18
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7910185/zenon-v-r-e-yeagher-management-corp/ ↗

Full Text

1,449 chars

“[A] contract is to be construed to give a reasonable effect to each of its provisions if possible.” McMahon v. Monarch Life Ins. Co., 345 Mass. 261, 264, 186 N.E.2d 827 (1962). “The object of the court is to construe the contract as a whole, in a reasonable and practical way, consistent with its language, background, and purpose.” USM Corp. v. Arthur D. Little Systems, Inc., 28 Mass. App. 108, 116, 546 N.E.2d 888 (1989). “A lease is to be read in the light of the circumstances of its execution . . . .” Robert Industries, Inc. v. Spence, 362 Mass. 751, 753, 291 N.E.2d 407 (1973). “It is fundamental that, in the construction of the language of a lease, it is proper to read together the different provisions therein dealing with the same subject matter, and where possible all the language used should be given a reasonable meaning. . . . Every deed is to be construed so as to give effect to the intent of the parties as manifested by the words used, interpreted in the light of the material circumstances and pertinent facts known to them at the time it was executed.” (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Markey v. Smith, supra, 301 Mass. 70. “Expressions in our cases to the effect that evidence of circumstances can be admitted only after an ambiguity has been found on the face of the written instrument have reference to evidence offered to contradict the written terms.” Robert Industries, Inc. v. Spence, supra, 754.

Other Sections in This Document (41)

Full Text