Panel questions whether guarantee interpretation is a matter of law or requires remand

During oral argument the bench asked whether the appellate court, finding the trial court misread the guarantee, should remand for further proceedings or simply determine the legal meaning of the contract and let the consequences flow.

The judge framed the question: "So assuming for a moment that we conclude that, that the trial court didn't read the guarantee correctly, is there any reason to remand for further proceedings, or would it make sense to remand as to make a determination as a matter of law of what the contract says and then let our...the consequences flow from that legal reading." James Ware responded that if the guarantee is unambiguous its interpretation is a matter of law and no further factual development is necessary beyond ministerial remand.