Question

Suppose an insurance contract contains inconsistent or contradictory provisions. Various parts of the contract are printed, typewritten, and handwritten. In seeking to determine the original intent, a court is likely to rely on?

1) The printed material first, then the typewritten, and then the handwritten.
2) All parts of the contract, giving equal importance to each.
3) The typewritten material first, then the printed, and then the handwritten.
4) The handwritten material first, then the typewritten, and then the printed.

Answer 1

Courts generally prioritize handwritten material first, typewritten second, and printed last when resolving inconsistencies in a contract, reflecting the latest amendments as the clearest expression of intent.

Step-by-step explanation:

When an insurance contract contains inconsistent or contradictory provisions, and the content includes printed, typewritten, and handwritten parts, courts have established rules for interpretation. In seeking to determine the original intent of the contract, a court is likely to give priority based on the presumption that the most recent amendments to a contract take precedence over earlier versions. Therefore, handwritten material is generally considered first because it is often used to record changes or additions to the existing text after the original document has been printed or typewritten. Next in line would typically be the typewritten material, followed by the printed material. This order reflects the logical assumption that the parties made their final intentions clear through the latest, most direct forms of correction or amendment, which are often handwritten.