Home Table of Contents

AMI 2421 Contract Interpretation—Specific and General Provisions

Arkansas Supreme Court Committee On Jury Instructions-Civil

Ark. Model Jury Instr., Civil AMI 2421
Arkansas Model Jury Instructions-Civil
November 2021 Update
Arkansas Supreme Court Committee On Jury Instructions-Civil
Chapter 24. Contracts
Contract Interpretation
AMI 2421 Contract Interpretation—Specific and General Provisions
If there is a contradiction between general provisions and more detailed, specific provisions in a contract, the specific provisions ordinarily qualify the meaning of the general provisions.
COMMENT
In Pate v. Goyne, 212 Ark. 51, 54, 204 S.W.2d 900 (1947), a case involving the interpretation of a real estate agency contract, the court stated the rule that “[w]here there is inconsistency between general and specific provisions, the specific provisions ordinarily qualify meaning of the general provisions …..” Likewise, in Missouri Pac. R. Co. v. Winburn Tile Mfg. Co., 461 F.2d 984 (8th Cir. 1972), the Eighth Circuit applied the rule set out in Pate to enforce a specific indemnity provision in conflict with more general terms of an “Industrial Track Agreement.”; Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 203, cmt. e (1981).
End of Document