Dear linkage71,
I don't know if the answer provided above helped you.
In general terms, as it resulted from a settlement or agreement
between the parties, in most states such an agreement regarding the
move would be interpreted in accord with the laws of contract. What
that means is that the court would first try to determine the meaning
of "approximately" from the plain language of the agreement. If that
is not possible, and as this is not the sort of agreement where there
is likely to be prior practice between the parties or "industry
standards", the court would likely look to additional evidence as
presented by the parties about their intentions in choosing that word.
(This type of evidence, extrinsic to the agreement and usually oral in
nature, is called "parol evidence".)
In your situation, it sounds like the court would be presented with
one side's testimony that there was an understanding based upon
discussions between the parties as to what "approximately" meant, and
the other side's testimony that there was not. The court would then
try to determine what was meant by "approximately", or if there was
never actually a "meeting of the minds" between the parties as to the
meaning of that term, and either find that the agreement was satisfied
or award appropriate relief.
There probably is not case law defining what "approximately" means in
this context, but there will be a great deal of case law detailing the
manner in which the court would make its determination, and how the
court would treat evidence or testimony about what the parties meant.
There may be case law discussing what "approximately" (or a similar
term) meant in other contexts, from which analogies could be drawn to
the present context - when dealing with a contested issue you rarely
find a case on an exact point, so that is typically how case law is
used by attorneys.
I would expect that the court will want to know from the party who was
supposed to pay for the move, "Why did it have to be right then? Why
couldn't you wait a couple of weeks?" The answer to that question may
have more of an impact on how the judge rules than the case law. |