Per Curiam.
We think that the trial court correctly submitted to the jury as the principal issue of fact in this case the question whether or not the plaintiffs had advised the defendant before execution of the contracts that they wished to erect a "year-round" as distinguished from a "summer" home. The word "building" as used in clause "Seventeenth" of each agreement is ambiguous in view of the claims of the parties.
Under the circumstances, however...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
