City of Rochester v. Corpening

I do not believe that a plain meaning analysis is the proper approach to examining the phrase “shall be subject to” as used in RSA 676:17, 1(b). Nor do I believe that the legislature intended its definition of motor vehicle junkyard in RSA 236:112 to be merely a gap-filler in the event that a municipality had not legislated in that area. For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.

I

I would not apply a plain meaning analysis to determine whether the phrase “be subject to” modifies what would generally be the mandatory nature of the word “shall” in RSA 676:17,1(b). As I do not believe that this…