Ambiguity or Contradiction in an Employment Contract

[WhistleBlowerFA]

What is the name of your state? Texas
I'm involved in a Whistleblower law suit that has as a significant component; the dispute of the interpretation of my employment contract. I've been looking for a US Supreme Court decision that addresses this principle that "any ambiguity or contradiction will be found to the detriment of the writer. " If anyone can provide a US Supreme Court cite addressing this issue, it would be most appreciated.

 

[Just Blue]

What is the name of your state? Texas
I'm involved in a Whistleblower law suit that has as a significant component; the dispute of the interpretation of my employment contract. I've been looking for a US Supreme Court decision that addresses this principle that "any ambiguity or contradiction will be found to the detriment of the writer. " If anyone can provide a US Supreme Court cite addressing this issue, it would be most appreciated.

Do you have an attorney?

 

[adjusterjack]

That is such a common element of contract law that there are probably thousands of appellate cases in state and federal courts that reiterate the principle.

Sorry to have to say this but a question like yours would lead one to believe that you are doing this without a lawyer and that you are in over your head.

However, if you want to knock yourself out looking for case decisions, try using Google Scholar, pick the courts and type in a few key words and see what you come up with:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_courts?hl=en&as_sdt=0,3

Just out of curiosity I picked the US Supreme Court and typed in ambiguity. Came up with 4,620 results.

Good luck.

 

[WhistleBlowerFA]

I've been Pro se in this case for six years and I'm well aware that there are thousands of cases that address the skirts of this issue in state cases. I made this post looking for some assistance in finding a US Supreme Court decision, because one of my cases is in Federal Court. Looking for some assistance.

 

[adjusterjack]

I provided assistance. Google Scholar - US Supreme Court - Ambiguity - 4,620 case decisions.

I'm not going to read them.

That's for you to do.

 

[Litigator22]

I've been Pro se in this case for six years and I'm well aware that there are thousands of cases that address the skirts of this issue in state cases. I made this post looking for some assistance in finding a US Supreme Court decision, because one of my cases is in Federal Court. Looking for some assistance, not nay sayers.

My my . . . are we so naïve as to think that the federal courts apply a special brand of contract law and one that is separate and apart from that followed in state tribunals; that in the federal court system rules governing the construction of contracts vary from those applied in the state courts?

No wonder your "case" is languishing in the dregs as you don't seem to have a clue about our system of jurisprudence. Not that you should have a clue except for the fact that you come on as some sort of a self-styled and somewhat arrogant expert.

And speaking of the United States Supreme Court have you bothered to read its decision in Eire Railroad Company v. Tompkins? There you might learn something about the application of substantive laws.

 

[WhistleBlowerFA]

For those who might come to this thread for some real assistance, I'm posting my own response to my question. United States v. Seckinger, 397 U.S. 203, 216 (1970), specifically addresses this topic.
In addition, state laws vary from state to state and may or may not be adopted by the Federal system.

 

[quincy]

Your own research was seemingly fruitful for you then. Good.

Good luck with your case.

 

[Zigner]

I find it humorous that the OP reached the conclusion that his referenced case "specifically addresses this topic."

 

[quincy]

I find it humorous that the OP reached the conclusion that his referenced case "specifically addresses this topic."

As do about 4000+ other cases ...

... but I guess if what WhistleBlower found makes him happy, that is nice for him.

 

[westside]

Must be quite the important matter to have wasted that great a percentage on one's life on it.

 

[quincy]

Must be quite the important matter to have wasted that great a percentage on one's life on it.

Six years is a long time. Some cases take that long (or far longer) to work their way through the court system, though.

The time and money investment necessary to pursue any legal action is definitely something that should be considered prior to filing.