Legal Question in Business Law in Minnesota

Re: Case law question on contract language

I would have to see the entire contract and understand the transaction more completely to give a definitive answer...The phrase as written is inherently ambiguous. The term "total collections" by itself would indicate that all revenues, including reimbursable expenses, would be included; however, the term "for work performed" adds an ambiguity but seems to suggest that only payments for actual services/work are included.

In a situation like this, the court would want to look at the entire contract, and if that didn't resolve the ambiguity it might look at factors outside the contract to determine what the intent of the parties was.

Sorry I can't give a clearer answer, but the problem lies in the phrase itself.

Let me know if I can be of further assistance. In any event, good luck to you and best wishes for the Holidays!