Court Opinion

ID: 9857864
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 16:04:13.049084+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:47:04.464385
License: Public Domain

RAWLINGS, Justice
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent.
If, in the enactment of Code § 613A.5 the intent of the General Assembly had been as now judicially impressed upon that Act by the majority, it could easily have so declared. This it did not do. This we should not do under the guise of statutory construction. See Shriver v. City of Jefferson, 190 N.W.2d 838, 839 (Iowa 1971); Davenport Water Co. v. Iowa State Commerce Com’n., 190 N.W.2d 583, 594 — 595 (Iowa 1971).
I adhere to the views expressed in Boyle v. Burt, 179 N.W.2d 513 (Iowa 1970) and submit they more nearly manifest the true legislative intent in enacting § 613A.5 than does the rationale here employed by the majority.
I would affirm.