Wallace v. Commissioner of Taxation

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that courts cannot supply language that the legislature did not use
• noting that the legislature grants discretion, but commissioners do not have “authority to determine what the law shall be or to supply a 16 substantive provision of the law which he thinks the legislature should have included in the first place”
• stating the “well-established” rule “that courts cannot supply that which the legislature purposely omits or inadvertently overlooks”
• prohibiting courts from supplying “that which the legislature purposely omits or inadvertently overlooks”
• quoted with approval in State v. Corbin, 343 N.W.2d 874, 876 (Minn.Ct.App.1984)
• quoted with approval in State v. Corbin, 343 N.W.2d 874, 876 (Minn.Ct.App.1984)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).