Legal Opinion · Dissent

Essex v. Washington

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided November 19, 1946No. 32184Published

1DissentRiley, J.

The issue presented in the case at bar is whether the proviso of the second subdivision of 84 O.S. 1941 §213 restricts and modifies the entire section, or whether the first sentence of the subdivision, as was held in Re Frary’s Estate, 186 Okla. 126, 96 P. 2d 526, restricts the proviso. The court labored in error with the last-mentioned opinion.

Under the general rule of construction, a proviso limits the immediate clause or general statement, unless the intention of language under construction refers to .the whole section. In re Bovier’s Estate, 52 Utah, 280, 172 P. 683. The proviso again…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Riggs v. SterlingMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  2. Appeal of Sims' EstateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
  3. Tooley v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1941
  4. In Re Estate of StoneSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
  5. Black v. HaynesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API