Court Opinion

ID: 9865850
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 22:02:44.279073+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:56:50.431323
License: Public Domain

Valentine, J.:
I concur in the decision of this case and *621in affirming the judgment of the court below. It is evident from the body of the act, (chapter 257 of the Laws of 1889,) that the legislature, in using the word “trade” in the title to the act, intended to include insurance, but did not intend to' include interstate commerce; and it is the duty of the courts to carry out the will and intention of the legislature when enacted into law, and when the same can be fairly ascertained, and not to defeat the same, although the legislature may not have used the most appropriate language in expressing its will and intention. There is nothing in this case with reference to lawyers or doctors or their business or profession. Hence, it is wholly unnecessary to say anything with reference thereto.