o
(Pl -
Guilford Transportations Industries is the land owner.
o
(Df -
Central Maine Power Company has an agreement with Guilford to maintain
and use occupations and appurtenances over, across, along and under
land belonging to Guildford and its affiliated railroads.
o
Public
Utilities Commission (PUC) is the agency that Guilford and CMP will use
in a dispute.
What Happened
o
PUC
held that the license agreement between CMP and Guilford gives CMP the
right cross Guilfords land with fiber optic cable.
o
Guilford contends that PUC misinterpreted the license agreement and that
it is does not cover fiber optic cable. |
Rule
o
Contact language is ambiguous when it is reasonably susceptible of
different interpretations.
o
If
appeal was from superior court, then the court could review the record
over again. De Novo (from the beginning).
o
Since
the appeal is made from the summary judgment made by PUC, the court will
only review if PUCs conclusions were unreasonable, unjust or unlawful.
o
Both
parties agreed to have PUC resolve the disputes.
Task 1:
Determine if contract is ambiguous
o
If the
contact is NOT ambiguous, then the court will interpret it, which
becomes a question of law.
o
If the
contact is ambiguous, its meaning is a question of fact for the
factfinder, and extrinsic evidence can be admitted to show the intention
of the parties.
o
Both
parties have reasonable, but contradictory interpretations of the
agreement.
Guilford
Arg
o
Wires
are a flexible metal that supports a current.
o
Random
House and American Heritage Dictionary.
o
The
fee schedule was based on appurtenances carrying between zero and 750
volts and fiber does not carrying any volts.
o
CMP
was ONLY an electricity company at the time of the agreement and the
parties could have ONLY intended appurtenances to mean electrical
conduits.
CMP Arg
o
Wires
include fiber a cable used to carry telephone or telegraph messages.
o
Chambers Science and Technology Dictionary and Oxford American
Dictionary
o
The
fee schedule includes wires of zero volts which would include fiber.
o
There
was nothing in the contract to exclude fiber, and if the parties
intended they would have done so.
Court
o
It is
apparent that Guilfords statement of material facts filed with the PUC
supports that fact that extrinsic evidence exists.
o
Both
parties briefs contain the history of dealings between the parties on
the fiber optic issue and IMPACT of proposed legislation on their
negotiation of the master license agreement.
o
Remanded back to PUC, because the license agreement is ambiguous and the
interpretation is a matter of fact for the fact finder.
|