Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:21-cv-01317
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Cerveceria Modelo v. CB Brand Strategies: Judge Kaplan granted defendants’ motion to exclude dictionary definitions of “beer” and “malt.”
The parties to the sublicense dispute, particularly the defendants whose motion was granted and whose proffered dictionary definitions were excluded.
What happened
In Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC, the defendants asked the court to exclude dictionary definitions of the lowercase terms “beer” and “malt” from the parties’ contract dispute.
The court explained that dictionaries may help determine a word’s ordinary meaning and whether a contract term is unclear. But dictionary definitions ordinarily are not outside evidence of what the parties intended when a contract term is unclear. The court found no evidence that either party had been shown the definitions during negotiations over the sublicense.
The court granted the motion. Judge Lewis A. Kaplan therefore excluded the proffered dictionary definitions from consideration as evidence of the parties’ intent.
The detailed version
- Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC · No. 1:21-cv-01317
- Lewis Kaplan
- Feb. 24, 2023
Motion
Defendants moved to exclude all dictionary definitions of the lowercase terms “beer” and “malt.” The motion concerned the interpretation of the parties’ sublicense.
Court’s reasoning
The court stated that dictionary definitions address the plain, ordinary meaning of words. Courts may appropriately consider them when construing unambiguous contracts and when deciding whether contractual terms are ambiguous; both are questions of law for the court. But dictionary definitions ordinarily are not extrinsic evidence—outside evidence used to show the parties’ intent—when interpreting ambiguous contractual terms.
The court was not aware of evidence that any of the proffered dictionary definitions had been brought to the attention of either party, much less both parties, when the sublicense was negotiated.
Disposition
The court granted defendants’ motion to exclude the dictionary definitions. The opinion does not decide the underlying contract dispute in this order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.