A settlement agreement involving an unpaid student loan provided that the student must remit[] not less than $600.00 monthly with each payment arriving at [the appropriate lending agency], not less more [sic] than 30 days apart. During later litigation, the parties argued as to whether the agreement meant the student had to make the payments more than or less than 30 days apart.

What factors would a court look at in determining how to interpret the above wording?

Is a court required to interpret a contracts words literally, even if that would result in an absurdity or would render[] the contract ineffective to accomplish its purpose?