Hattiesburg Plumbing Co. v. Carmichael & Co.
This text of 80 Miss. 66 (Hattiesburg Plumbing Co. v. Carmichael & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
The primary definition in all the dictionaries of the word “artesian” indicates a well from which the water flows naturally without artificial pressure; but the secondary definition of this word in the Century and Standard dictionaries, and others, seems to indicate that it may be applied also to wells from which the- water is made to flow by artificial means. The word “artesian,” therefore, becomes a term of equivocal significance, standing unexplained in a contract. It was hence competent to introduce parol testimony to show what meaning it had in this particular contract. The court, consequently, erred in excluding this testimony; it should receive all parol testimony showing what meaning this word “artesian” had as used by the parties to this contract.
Reversed and remanded,
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
80 Miss. 66, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hattiesburg-plumbing-co-v-carmichael-co-miss-1902.