State Ex Rel. Riffle v. Ranson

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that this Court’s “duty is to interpret ... [a] statute, not to expand or enlarge upon it”
• providing that “W. Va. Code, 56-1-1(b) (1986), is the exclusive authority for a discretionary transfer or change of venue . . . .”
• explaining that “it has been the policy in this State and country that, unless a statute provided otherwise, the plaintiffs choice of forum should rarely be disturbed.” (citing Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 508, 67 S.Ct. 839, 843, 91 L.Ed. 1055, 1062 (1947).)
• \ Expressio unius est exclusio alterius (express mention of one thing implies exclusion of all others) is a well-accepted canon of statutory construction.\
• “Expressio unius est exclusio alterius (express mention of one thing implies exclusion of all others) is a well-accepted canon of statutory construction.”
• “Expressio unius est exclusio alterius (express mention of one thing implies exclusion of all others) is a well-accepted canon of statutory construction.” (citations omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).