Court Opinion

ID: 9656175
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 19:41:27.707205+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:29.836414
License: Public Domain

GILDEA, Justice
(concurring).
I concur with the majority’s conclusion to reverse the court of appeals. I write separately to express my view that we should not invoke principles of statutory construction to resolve this case.
The majority holds that the provisions of Minn.Stat. § 15.99 that are at issue — subdivisions 2(a) and 2(c) — are not ambiguous. I agree. When we conclude that a statute is not ambiguous, as we have done here, “statutory construction is neither necessary nor permitted.” Am. Tower, L.P. v. City of Grant, 636 N.W.2d 309, 312 (Minn.2001) (emphasis added). Our only task is to apply the clear language of these provisions to the facts of this case. This application, as the majority demonstrates, requires reversal. Nothing more need be said.