Guinness v. State
Washington Supreme Court
1DissentDonworth, J.
(dissenting)—The majority, in my opinion, has speculated as to what it believes the legislature was “trying to say” (but did not say) in Rem. Supp. 1945, § 11201, instead of applying to the words actually used therein the meaning which the context indicates that the legislature intended.
The majority also says that it finds no ambiguity in § 11201. It seems to me that the discussion accorded by the majority to the meaning of the words “which shall pass by will or by the statutes of inheritance of this or any other state” is an implicit recognition of an ambiguity therein. The position of the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Eidman v. MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- State v. AlstonTennessee Supreme Court · 1895
- Billings v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1901
- Pacific First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Pierce CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1947
- State v. HamlinSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1894
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.