Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bond v. Lavaca School District

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided December 20, 2001No. 01-303Published

1DissentJ Im Hannah, Justice

I must respectfully dissent. I cannot agree with the majority’s analysis of Ark. Code Ann. § 6-17-807. The first rule in considering the meaning and effect of a statute is to construe it just as it reads, giving the words their ordinary and usually accepted meaning in common language. Western Carroll Cty. Amb. Dist. v. Johnson, 345 Ark. 95, 44 S.W.2d3d 284 (2001). The language of the statute at issue states, “if additional days are added to a teacher’s contract or if the teacher is required to work more days than provided for under the teacher’s contract. ...” The use of the disjunctive “or”…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Clemmons v. Office of Child Support EnforcementSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
  2. Western Carroll County Ambulance District v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API