Legal Opinion

Bird v. Board of Commissioners

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided December 9, 1893PublishedCited by 26 opinions

Case 32 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PIIOM KENTON CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The power of the court is limited to the reading of the statute as it is, and it can not alter or change the language to conform, to what it may suppose the Legislature intended contrary to the unambiguous meaning of the words used. Nor can anything found in the original and unsigned bill be resorted to for the purpose of aiding in the construction of the act. (Field v. Clark, 143 IT.

Read the full summary

Case 32 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL PIIOM KENTON CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The power of the court is limited to the reading of the statute as it is, and it can not alter or change the language to conform, to what it may suppose the Legislature intended contrary to the unambiguous meaning of the words used. Nor can anything found in the original and unsigned bill be resorted to for the purpose of aiding in the construction of the act. (Field v. Clark, 143 IT. S., 649; Sherman v. Story, 80 Cal., 253, 276; Norman, Auditor, v. Ky. Board of Managers, &c., 14Ky. Law Rep., 529; s. c., 93 Ky., 537.) 2. A whole…

1Opinion of the Court

JUDGE PRYOR

delivered the opinion of the court.

The taxing district as laid off by the Legislature was to equalize the burden with the taxpayers, and we perceive nothing in the act that could produce such an inequality as would induce or authorize this court to interfere. Taxing districts created for turnpike purposes, whether constituting the whole or a part of a county, have been upheld by this court in many instances, and the only question proper for consideration in this case is, shall this court, when a statute has been enacted of such public utility as in this case, look to the plain…

2Cited by26 opinions

  1. Pressman v. State Tax CommissionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1985
  2. City of Princeton v. Princeton Electric Light & Power Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915
  3. Attorney General v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Hardy v. RussellCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1918
  5. State ex rel. Patterson v. BatesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API