Court Opinion

ID: 9538622
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 07:38:24.124678+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:58:00.472691
License: Public Domain

MATTHEWS, Justice,
with whom RABINOWITZ, Chief Justice, joins, concurring.
I concur in the result of the majority opinion, and in the reasoning. However, in proceeding from the conclusion that the deeds are ambiguous (Maj.Op. at 627), to a discussion of the extrinsic circumstances in order to determine what the deeds mean (Maj.Op. at 628-629 et seq.), the opinion digresses to examine the question whether gravel is a mineral. This question has not been raised by the parties and its resolution plays no role in today’s decision. Because I believe that the expression of views on important legal subjects that are not briefed or argued should be avoided in judicial opinions, I do not concur in this discussion.