Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Fausnight v. Perkins

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided May 23, 2008No. 1060171Published

1Concurrence

I concur fully in the main opinion. I write simply to note that although "[i]t is well-settled law in this State that the interpretation of a statute begins with the plain language of the statute itself," Housing Auth. of Huntsville v.Hartford Accident Indem. Co., 954 So.2d 577, 582 (Ala. 2006), the statute in this case is silent as to whether the Perkinses have a claim for restitution from Fausnight. When a statute is silent, this Court will look outside of the plain language of the statute to determine the intent of the legislature. See, e.g., Ex parte Baron Servs., Inc.,874 So.2d 545, 549…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ex Parte State Dept. of RevenueSupreme Court of Alabama · 1996
  2. Ex Parte Baron Services, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2003
  3. Housing Author. v. Hartford Acc. and Indem.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2006
  4. Old Republic Sur. Co. v. Auction Way Sales, Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API