California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Roberts v. Reynolds, 212 Cal.App.2d 818, 28 Cal.Rptr. 261 (Cal. App. 1963):
The governing law with respect to appellate review of the determination made by the trial court is stated in Scott v. SunMaid Raisin Growers Assn., 13 Cal.App.2d 353, at page 359, 57 P.2d 148, at page 151: 'When the meaning of the language of a contract is uncertain or doubtful and parol evidence is introduced in aid of its interpretation, the question of its meaning is one of fact and a finding of fact made by the trier of facts embodying his interpretation of [212 Cal.App.2d 826] the doubtful language must stand if not lacking in evidentiary support.' In the present case there is the necessary evidentiary support for the determination of the trial court. 4 In fact, it is a fair inference from the record that if the agreement does not apply to the obligation to which the plaintiffs may have subjected themselves under the pertinent law, it is practically meaningless because there is no other liability to which it could have reference.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.