Image via Wikipedia

Several well established principles of statutory construction guide our interpretation of section 6 1 113. We initially rely on the language of the statute, giving words and phrases their plain and ordinary meaning. See Moody v. Corsentino, 843 P.2d 1355, 1370 (Colo. 1993); People v. Guenther, 740 P.2d 971, 975 (Colo. 1987). We must give effect to the spirit and intent of the General Assembly in enacting the statute. See Brock v. Nyland, 955 P.2d 1037, 1040 (Colo. 1998). A statutory interpretation that defeats the legislative intent or leads to an absurd result will not be followed. See Avicomm, Inc. v. Colorado Pub. Utils. Comm’n, 955 P.2d 1023, 1031 (Colo. 1998). Although we must give effect to the statute’s plain and ordinary meaning, the intention of the legislature prevails over a literal interpretation of the statute that would lead to an absurd result, see id., or that would conflict with the Colorado or United States Constitutions. See People v. Washburn, 197 Colo. 419, 423, 593 P.2d 962, 964 (1979).

• What are some Principles of Statutory Construction? III
• Have You Seen This Revenue Ruling on Summary Record of Assessment FOIA Requests?
• Colorado Supreme Court Asked to Hold Trial Judge in Contempt Part 4
• When is an Unconstitutional Law Law?
• What are some Principles of Statutory Construction? II
• When Does a Statute Create a Private Right of Action?
• Can an Excessive Assessment be Abated Because It was Computed on a Wrong Legal Theory?
• How Should Words Grouped in a List be Related?
• When is Common Law Deemed Repealed?