Parks v. Knox

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Parks v. Knox

22 Me. 494

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided April 15, 1843·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam

— The language of the statute, Revised Stat[495]*495utes, c. 119, <§> 63, is not obscure or ambiguous; nor is it inconsistent with any other provision therein.

The legislature may have overlooked the effect of their language in this instance; but if they have, it is for that body to cure the defect. We are not at liberty to do it.

The exceptions are overruled, and the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

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

Per Curiam

— The language of the statute, Revised Stat[495]*495utes, c. 119, <§> 63, is not obscure or ambiguous; nor is it inconsistent with any other provision therein.

The legislature may have overlooked the effect of their language in this instance; but if they have, it is for that body to cure the defect. We are not at liberty to do it.

The exceptions are overruled, and the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Parks v. Knox, 22 Me. 494 (Me. 1843).

Pincite

22 Me. 494 (Parks v. Knox) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.