Documents that convey easements are subject to the same rules of construction as other contracts and should be interpreted using contract principles. See, e.g., Los Angeles County v. Wright, 107 Cal.App.2d 235, 236 P.2d 892 (1951); Percy A. Brown & Co. v. Raub, 357 Pa. 271, 54 A.2d 35 (1947); U.S. v. Sea Gate, Inc., 397 F.Supp. 1351 (D.C.N.C.1975). The right to contract is.subject to the limitation that the agreement must be legal. In general, Florida courts are under no obligation to discern the intent of the parties from language contained within an illegal contract. E.g., Katz v. Woltin, 765 So.2d 279 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (recognizing that where a contract is illegal, no action may be brought on it, whether in law or in equity); Castro v. Sangles, 637 So.2d 989 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (<HOLDING>). Here, the Agreement is invalid on its face
holding that action for wrongful death may generally not be maintained where death was selfinflicted holding that the court has no authority to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the merits of an action to determine whether it may be maintained as a class action holding a wrongful death action may not be maintained for the death of an unborn child recognizing that an action at common law can be maintained on an arbitration award rendered under the parties submission that does not comply with the arbitration statute holding that no action may be maintained on an illegal agreement