Harp v. Wilson

Supreme Court of Kansas

Harp v. Wilson

113 P. 309, 84 Kan. 45, 1911 Kan. LEXIS 278

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedFebruary 11, 1911

DocketNo. 16,842

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 113 P. 309 (Harp v. Wilson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Harp v. Wilson, 113 P. 309, 84 Kan. 45, 1911 Kan. LEXIS 278 (kan 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

West, J.:

This appeal involves only the construction of original section 137 of chapter 34 of the Laws of 1876, entitled “An act to provide for the assessment [46]*46and collection, of taxes” (Gen. Stat. 1901, § 7671),. which required the county treasurer to state in the redemption notice “the amount of taxes charged, and interest calculated to the last day of redemption.”

It is urged that the legislature intended by this provision that the treasurer should state “the amount of taxes, charges, and interest”; that this was shown by the change in the statute made by the legislature (Laws 1905, ch. 499, Gen. Stat. 1909, § 9474), and that Casner v. Gahlman, 6 Kan. App. 295, 60 Kan. 857, and Shinkle v. Meek, 69 Kan. 368, should be overruled.The language of the original section is of itself entirely free from ambiguity, and with its wisdom we have no concern. The argument that' the legislature, having used the expression “taxes, charges, and interest” frequently in the original act, and the words under consideration but once, which words could be made to correspond with the other expressions by placing a comma and changing “d” to “s,” is plausible, but not sufficient to overturn the doctrine of stare clecisis. The ruling of the trial court is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The opinion of the court was delivered by

West, J.:

This appeal involves only the construction of original section 137 of chapter 34 of the Laws of 1876, entitled “An act to provide for the assessment [46]*46and collection, of taxes” (Gen. Stat. 1901, § 7671),. which required the county treasurer to state in the redemption notice “the amount of taxes charged, and interest calculated to the last day of redemption.”

It is urged that the legislature intended by this provision that the treasurer should state “the amount of taxes, charges, and interest”; that this was shown by the change in the statute made by the legislature (Laws 1905, ch. 499, Gen. Stat. 1909, § 9474), and that Casner v. Gahlman, 6 Kan. App. 295, 60 Kan. 857, and Shinkle v. Meek, 69 Kan. 368, should be overruled.The language of the original section is of itself entirely free from ambiguity, and with its wisdom we have no concern. The argument that' the legislature, having used the expression “taxes, charges, and interest” frequently in the original act, and the words under consideration but once, which words could be made to correspond with the other expressions by placing a comma and changing “d” to “s,” is plausible, but not sufficient to overturn the doctrine of stare clecisis. The ruling of the trial court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 P. 309, 84 Kan. 45, 1911 Kan. LEXIS 278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harp-v-wilson-kan-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack