Court Opinion

ID: 9633574
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 11:52:45.34681+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:08:37.685180
License: Public Domain

Price, J.,
dissenting in part: As abstract principles of law— I agree with the rules of statutory construction set forth in the court’s decision. I thoroughly disagree, however, that reliance on those rules may be had in order to correct the very patent legislative error contained in the act under consideration. In plain and unambiguous language the legislature placed precinct 4 of ward 2 in the city of Prairie Village in two separate representative districts. As stated by this court in many decisions, the universal rule is that where a statute is plain and unambiguous there is left no room for “judical construction” so as to change the language employed therein. There should be a limit on just how far a court may go in “black-smithing” a legislative act — considerations of expediency notwithstanding. In my opinion that limit has been extended far beyond all reason and well-established principles heretofore followed. I concede that undoubtedly the legislature intended to place precinct 4 of ward 2 in only one representative district, but, as I view *641this matter, the court is confronted not with what the legislature may have intended to do — but rather with what in fact was done, and the defect is one which the legislature alone can correct.
I therefore dissent from that portion of the court’s decision dealing with this specific matter.