Strong v. Abner

How courts have described this case

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

• “Under such conditions [of unintelligibility] the court can do nothing but conjecture, and in doing so it would allocate to itself legislative functions, but which is everywhere conceded it has no right to do.”
• When a court is “left in the dark with no lights furnished by the statute to dissipate that darkness” it cannot engage in conjecture lest it “allocate to itself legislative functions”
• When a court is \left in the dark with no lights furnished by the statute to dissipate that darkness\ it cannot engage in conjecture lest it \allocate to itself legislative functions\
• When a court is \left in the dark with no lights furnished by the statute to dissipate that darkness\ it cannot engage in conjecture lest it \allocate to itself legislative functions\
• void-for-vagueness doctrine only applies “with greater emphasis” to criminal statutes
• void-for-vagueness doctrine only applies \with greater emphasis\ to criminal statutes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).