When two statutes on the same subject must be construed together, the court should attempt to give effect to both
How later courts described this case
- When two statutes on the same subject must be construed together, the court should attempt to give effect to both
- “When a statute is ambiguous, the court must ascertain the intent of the legislature and interpret the statute to effectuate that intent.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
On Petition for Rehearing
Robertson, C.J.
Economy, in its petition for rehearing, seeks clarification of that part of the opinion which remands this cause to the trial court.
This Court reversed only the following Findings of Fact.
“13. The gross Retail Tax Act (sales tax) of 1963 did not specifically include motor fuel and the same was not specifically included under said act until the acts of 1973, Public Law 49, p. 229, 237 at Section 5.
15. The Court finds that the Legislature did not intend to include motor fuel in the Grocery (sic) Retail Sales Tax Act of 1963.”
*671 All other Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Court’s Order, Decree and Judgment are affirmed. On remand the trial court should modify its Findings of Fact to delete said Findings of Fact 13 and 15 only. Economy’s judgment should be paid according to law.
All other points raised by Economy are denied.
Lowdermilk and Lybrook, JJ., concur.
Note. — Reported at 321 N.E.2d 215 .