elementary principle (Rhode Island) · Go Syfert
← Rhode Island issues

elementary principle in Rhode Island

6 Rhode Island opinions name it 1 courts 1895–2017 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Rhode Island courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Public Citizen, Inc. v. Minetagreen
ca2 · 2003 · cited in 1 Rhode Island opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017Jur. 2d Statutes § 145 at 381 (2012); see also Public Citizen, Inc. v. Mineta, 340 F.3d 39, 54 (2d Cir. 2003) (applying “the elementary rule of statutory construction that the singular * * * includes the plural”).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Rhode Island. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Wilkinson v. Harrington green
ri · 1968
1 sentence

1969Wilkinson v. Harrington, R.I. 243 A.2d 745 .

11969–1969
Magill v. North American Refractories Company green
del · 1956
1 sentence

1960Ch. 185 , 128 A.2d 233 , at page 236: “That the clear and unambiguous language in a statute is ordinarily the conclusive evidence of legislative intent is an elementary rule.

11960–1960
Tufts v. Hancox neutral
mass · 1898
1 sentence

1905In Tufts v. Hancox, 171 Mass. 148 (1898), Field, C.

11905–1905
Smith v. State green
conn · 1849
1 sentence

1905App. 646 ; Richardson v. Beldam , 18 id. 527; Jasper et al. v. Schlesinger et al., 22 id. 637.” *220 In Smith v. State, 19 Conn. 493 , the court said: “It is an elementary principle, that a record imports verity and can not be contradicted,” in that case even applying the doctrine to the record of a justice of the peace.

11905–1905
Bronner v. Jahant green
cal · 1894
1 sentence

1903It is not uncommon for a testator to make his will for the sole purpose of nominating an executor to administer his estate.” To the same effect see In re Hickman, 101 Cal. 609 ; and in Prater v. Whittle, 16 S. C. 40-46, it is said: “So little has the Probate Court to do with the contents of a will or its construction that it is laid down as an elementary principle that The bare nomination of an executor, without giving any legacy or appointing anything to be done by him is sufficient to make it a will, and as a will it is to be proved.’ ” The decisions cited by the contestants are mostly aside

11903–1903
Plimpton v. . Bigelow green
ny · 1883
1 sentence

1895Plimpton v. Bigelow, 93 N. Y. 592 .

11895–1895

Where else courts name it

CA 301 (1889–2026) TX 180 (1876–2026) GA 147 (1899–2022) IL 143 (1873–2026) NY 141 (1833–2019) CT 86 (1835–2025) IN 85 (1879–2024) PA 78 (1834–2021) FL 76 (1899–2025) NC 70 (1824–2026) KY 63 (1891–2026) WI 63 (1875–2022) MO 55 (1881–2024) IA 55 (1863–2023) VA 54 (1851–2025) MD 54 (1906–2022) MI 53 (1888–2026) TN 52 (1875–2025) AL 51 (1874–2022) WV 50 (1884–2024) MA 48 (1880–2025) AR 47 (1898–2024) LA 47 (1908–2009) OK 46 (1900–2007) MT 42 (1893–2017) WA 41 (1891–2025) KS 39 (1916–2021) ME 37 (1851–2022) OR 33 (1887–2015) NE 32 (1892–2019) MS 29 (1895–2023) HI 29 (1902–2026) MN 28 (1888–2015) OH 27 (1881–2020) CO 26 (1894–2010) NJ 25 (1867–2025) UT 23 (1899–2013) SD 19 (1894–2026) SC 19 (1907–2018) ID 17 (1909–2023) DE 16 (1932–2020) AZ 15 (1903–2009) ND 13 (1898–2020) NM 12 (1907–2023) WY 12 (1930–2014) VT 10 (1865–1986) NH 10 (1860–2016) NV 9 (1913–2015) RI 6 (1895–2017) AK 6 (1985–2023) DC 6 (1948–2013) PR 3 (1904–1939) VI 2 (1984–2007)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check