Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Kirk v. High

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 29, 1925No. Nos. 9152, 9154Published

1ConcurrenceHart, J.

It has been aptly said that State Constitutions are framed for the very purpose of adaptation to the progress of the times and to be -a general, not special, rule of action and restraint.

■ While it is true that in interpreting a Constitution it is to be read as it is written, still the Constitution and the amendments thereto must be so interpreted as to give effect to every part thereof and leave each part some office to perform. It is a primary rule of construction that the Constitution must be considered as a whole, and to get at the meaning of any part of it, we must read it in the light…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. The People Ex Rel. Jackson v. . PotterNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  2. Little Rock v. North Little RockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
  3. Cole v. White CountySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1877
  4. Ferrell v. KeelSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
  5. State ex rel. Little Rock v. DonagheySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912

1 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