Patton v. Vanterpool

OCGA § 19-7-21 contains a latent ambiguity. The ambiguity arose because the General Assembly failed to anticipate subsequent advances in medical technology when it described the class of children under the statute’s protection. In resolving that ambiguity we are required to apply a rule that is in our current Code, was in our first Code, can be traced back to Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Law of England, and so was part of the “common law and statutes of England in force prior to May 14,1776 [that, in 1784,] were adopted in this [s] tate by statute.” Hannah v. State, 212 Ga. 313, 321-322…