Neither party points to an applicable case or regulation; our review of the Code of Federal Regulations and the Federal Register found the phrase being used but not defined. See, e.g., 20 C.F.R. § 655.202(b)(5)(h); 64 Fed.Reg. 34958 (June 29, 1999); 52 Fed.Reg. 20496 (June 1,1987). We now review the rules of construction in Florida contract law to see if any provide guidance. To ascertain the intent of the parties, courts may “receive evidence extrinsic to the contract for the purpose of determining the intent of the parties at the time of the contract.” See Gulf Cities Gas Corp. v. Tangelo Park Serv. Co., 253 So.2d 744, 748 (Fla.4th Dist.Ct.App.1971); see also First Capital Income & Growth Funds, Ltd.-Series XII v. Baumann, 616 So.2d 163, 165 (Fla.3d Dist.Ct.App.1993) (<HOLDING>). Courts also can consider circumstances
recognizing ambiguous terms of plea agreement are construed against government holding that parol evidence can be presented when the terms of the agreement are ambiguous holding that parol evidence is admissible to resolve a contractual term that is ambiguous holding that when a contract is partially parol and partially written parol evidence may prove the parol terms holding the parol evidence rule presumes finality with respect to the written terms of the agreement only and does not prevent consideration of parol evidence concerning the duration of contract