Skip to main content

Allan v. R.D. Offutt Co.

Citations

  • 869 N.W.2d 31
  • 2015 Minn. LEXIS 476
  • 2015 WL 5123595

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that statutes should be interpreted such that “no word, phrase, or sentence [is] superfluous, void, or insignificant”
  • noting that in statutory interpretation, “no word, phrase, or sentence should be deemed superfluous, void, or insignificant” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)
  • noting that we “give effect to all of [the statute’s] provisions; no word, phrase, or sentence should be deemed superfluous, void, or insignificant” (alternation in original) (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)
  • noting that we “give effect to all of [the statute’s] provisions; no word, phrase, or sentence should be deemed superfluous, void, or insignificant” (alternation in original) (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)
  • “When the language of a statute is plain'and unambiguous, it is assumed‘to manifest legislative intent and must be given effect.”
  • “When the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, it is assumed to manifest legislative intent and must be given effect.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Anderson, Lillehaug, Wright

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

24 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.