Bergin v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• Washington Supreme Court found that negative phrasing could still mean exclusivity of a provision and did not just mean a minimum
• \we are not swayed in our analysis of [the term limits initiative] by the policy merits or demerits of term limits for officeholders\
• \[T]he people in their legislative capacity remain subject to the mandates of the Constitution.\
• \Mandamus will lie to compel a state officer to undertake a clear duty.\
• \Mandamus will lie to compel a state officer to undertake a clear duty.\
• Dicta is language not necessary to the decision and \need not be followed.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).