In this case, the court said «When two words are used in a contract, the rule of construction is that the words have
different meanings», which caused the court to assign distinct
meanings to the words (which are
typically used as though they
mean the same
thing), which doesn't seem to have been the original intent.
Actually, the only
thing you need to know before we begin is that the academic
meaning of «attachment» is
different from the more general and loose use of «attachment» which we
typically read about in popular parenting magazines etc..