Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Olson v. Job Service North Dakota

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided February 26, 2013No. 20120250Published

1ConcurrenceCrothers, Justice

[¶ 31] I concur in the result reached by the majority. I respectfully submit the *47discussion by the majority and the dissent have gone farther afield than necessary to decide this case.

[¶ 32] We are directed by law to interpret words in a statute according to their ordinary sense. N.D.C.C. § 1-02-02. “When the wording of a statute is clear and free of all ambiguity, the letter of it is not to be disregarded under the pretext of pursuing its spirit.” N.D.C.C. § 1-02-05. The statute at issue here provides in pertinent part:

“An individual is disqualified for benefits:

[[Image here]]

“For any week…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Alexander v. Employment Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Iowa · 1988
  2. Mead Products v. Industrial CommissionMissouri Court of Appeals · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API