State Ex Rel. Van Nguyen v. Berger

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “because [the penal statute] is not vague or ambiguous, there is no need to construe the statute, and we need not turn to the rules of statutory construction, including the maxim of expressio unius est exclusio alterius ”
• “[T]he common law, if not repugnant of the Constitution of this State, continues as the law of this State unless it is altered or changed by the Legislature.”
• “ ‘ “The common law is not to be construed as altered or changed by statute, unless legislative intent to do so be plainly manifested.” Shifflette v. Lilly, 130 W.Va. 297[, 43 S.E.2d 289 (1947) ].’ Syllabus Point 4, Seagraves v. Legg, 147 W.Va. 331, 127 5.E.2d 605 (1962).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).