fundamental rule in Kansas

2024State v. LaPointe, 309 Kan. 299 , 314, 434 P.3d 850 (2019).

2024State v. LaPointe, 309 Kan. 299 , 314, 434 P.3d 850 (2019).

2016We exercise unlimited review over questions of statutory interpretation, and the principles we follow are well settled: "The most fundamental rule is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained. [State v.] Arnett, 290 Kan. [41,] 47[, 223 P.3d 780 (2010)].

2012The most fundamental rule is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained. 290 Kan. at 47 .

2019"The most fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained." Bergstrom v. Spears Manufacturing Co. , 289 Kan. 605 , 607, 214 P.3d 676 (2009).

2019"The most fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained." Bergstrom v. Spears Manufacturing Co. , 289 Kan. 605 , 607, 214 P.3d 676 (2009).

1997It is a fundamental rule of statutory construction to which all other rules are subordinate that the intent of the legislature governs when that intent can be ascertained.” “When a statute is plain and unambiguous, the court must give effect to the intention of the legislature as expressed, rather than determine what the law should or should not be.” Martindale v. Tenny, 250 Kan. 621 , Syl. ¶¶ 1, 2, 829 P.2d 561 (1992).

1997It is a fundamental rule of statutory construction to which all other rules are subordinate that the intent of the legislature governs when that intent can be ascertained.” “When a statute is plain and unambiguous, the court must give effect to the intention of the legislature as expressed, rather than determine what the law should or should not be.” Martindale v. Tenny, 250 Kan. 621 , Syl. ¶¶ 1, 2, 829 P.2d 561 (1992).

2016Typically, when we conduct our de novo review of statutes, we begin with the most fundamental rule of statutory construction: The intent of the legislature governs. 157 State v. Williams, 298 Kan. 1075, 1079 , 319 P.3d 528 (2014).

2016Typically, when we conduct our de novo review of statutes, we begin with the most fundamental rule of statutory construction: The intent of the legislature governs. 157 State v. Williams, 298 Kan. 1075, 1079 , 319 P.3d 528 (2014).

1995“The fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the purpose and intent of the legislature governs when the intent can be ascertained from the statute.” State v. Adee, 241 Kan. 825, 829 , 740 P.2d 611 (1987).

1995“The fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the purpose and intent of the legislature governs when the intent can be ascertained from the statute.” State v. Adee, 241 Kan. 825, 829 , 740 P.2d 611 (1987).

2024Ed. 2d 18 (1976) ("The fundamental requirement of due process is the opportunity to be heard 'at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.'"); Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 313 , 70 S. Ct. 652 , 94 L.

2024Ed. 2d 18 (1976) ("The fundamental requirement of due process is the opportunity to be heard 'at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.'"); Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 313 , 70 S. Ct. 652 , 94 L.

1998“The fundamental rule is that a statute operates prospectively unless its language clearly indicates that the legislature intended it to operate retroactively. [Citation omitted.] An exception to the fundamental rule is that if the statutory change does not prejudicially affect the substantive rights of the parties and is merely procedural or remedial in nature, it applies retroactively. [Citation omitted.] Thus, the issue becomes whether the statute is substantive criminal law, which either defines a crime or involves the length or type of punishment.” State v. Sutherland, 248 Kan. 96, 106 ,

1998“The fundamental rule is that a statute operates prospectively unless its language clearly indicates that the legislature intended it to operate retroactively. [Citation omitted.] An exception to the fundamental rule is that if the statutory change does not prejudicially affect the substantive rights of the parties and is merely procedural or remedial in nature, it applies retroactively. [Citation omitted.] Thus, the issue becomes whether the statute is substantive criminal law, which either defines a crime or involves the length or type of punishment.” State v. Sutherland, 248 Kan. 96, 106 ,

2005We therefore examine what is meant by “full hearing.” “ ‘The fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the intent of the legislature governs. [Citation omitted.] When construing a statute, a court should give words in common usage their natural and ordinary meaning.’ ” Sawyer v. Oldhams Farm Sausage Co., 246 Kan. 327, 331 , 787 P.2d 697 (1990) (quoting Hill v. Hill, 13 Kan.

1993“The fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the intent of the legislature governs. [Citation omitted.] When construing a statute, a court should give words in common usage their natural and ordinary meaning.” Hill v. Hill, 13 Kan.

1997The fundamental rule in Kansas is that a tax exemption statute is to be construed strictly in favor of imposing a tax and against an allowance of an exemption for one who does not clearly qualify. [Citation omitted.] The burden of establishing an exemption from taxation is upon the one claiming the exemption. [Citation omitted.]” Director of Taxation v. Kansas Krude Oil Reclaiming Co., 236 Kan. 450, 454 , 691 P.2d 1303 (1984).

1997The fundamental rule in Kansas is that a tax exemption statute is to be construed strictly in favor of imposing a tax and against an allowance of an exemption for one who does not clearly qualify. [Citation omitted.] The burden of establishing an exemption from taxation is upon the one claiming the exemption. [Citation omitted.]” Director of Taxation v. Kansas Krude Oil Reclaiming Co., 236 Kan. 450, 454 , 691 P.2d 1303 (1984).

2011The most fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained. *298 Hall v. Dillon Companies, Inc., 286 Kan. 777, 785 , 189 P.3d 508 (2008).

2011The most fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained. *298 Hall v. Dillon Companies, Inc., 286 Kan. 777, 785 , 189 P.3d 508 (2008).

1991“The fundamental rule of statutory construction, to which all others are subordinate, is that the intent of the legislature governs .... [Citations omitted.] In determining legislative intent, courts are not limited to consideration of the language used in the statute, but may look to the historical background of the enactment, the circumstances attending its passage, the purpose to be accomplished, and the effect the statute may have under the various constructions suggested. [Citations omitted.] Ordinarily, courts presume that by changing the language of a statute the legislature intends to

1990The rules for statutory construction are well known: “The fundamental rule of statutory construction, to which all others are subordinate, is that the intent of the legislature governs; the court must give effect to the legislature’s intent ‘even though words, phrases or clauses at some place in the statute must be omitted or inserted.’ [Citations omitted.] In determining legislative intent, courts are not limited to consideration of the language used in the statute, but may look to the historical background of the enactment, the circumstances attending its passage, the purpose to be accomplis

2023State v. Looney, 299 Kan. 903, 906 , 327 P.3d 425 (2014). "'The most fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the intent of the Legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained.

2023State v. Looney, 299 Kan. 903, 906 , 327 P.3d 425 (2014). "'The most fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the intent of the Legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained.

1997The Magness court noted that the statute was a product of the legislature but its roots originated in the Judicial Council: “ ‘The fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the purpose and intent of the legislature governs.’ State v. Cole, 238 Kan. 370, 371 , 710 P.2d 25 (1985).

1997The Magness court noted that the statute was a product of the legislature but its roots originated in the Judicial Council: “ ‘The fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the purpose and intent of the legislature governs.’ State v. Cole, 238 Kan. 370, 371 , 710 P.2d 25 (1985).

1978“The fundamental rule of statutory construction, to which all others are subordinate, is that the purpose and intent of the legislature governs when that intent can be ascertained from the statute.” Easom v. Farmers Insurance Co., 221 Kan. 415 , Syl. 2, 560 P.2d 117 .

1978“The fundamental rule of statutory construction, to which all others are subordinate, is that the purpose and intent of the legislature governs when that intent can be ascertained from the statute.” Easom v. Farmers Insurance Co., 221 Kan. 415 , Syl. 2, 560 P.2d 117 .

2026When asked to interpret a statute we begin with the fundamental rule that "'the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained.'" Harsay v. University of Kansas, 308 Kan. 1371 , 1381, 430 P.3d 30 (2018) (citing In re Estate of Strader, 301 Kan. 50, 55 , 339 P.3d 769 [2014]).

2022Harsay v. University of Kansas, 308 Kan. 1371 , 1381, 430 P.3d 30 (2018).

2005As was said in Williamson v. City of Hays, 275 Kan. 300, 305 , 64 P.3d 364 (2003): “The fundamental rule of statutory construction to which all other rules are subordinate is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained.

2005As was said in Williamson v. City of Hays, 275 Kan. 300, 305 , 64 P.3d 364 (2003): “The fundamental rule of statutory construction to which all other rules are subordinate is that the intent of the legislature governs if that intent can be ascertained.