Anderson v. Black & Decker (U.S.), Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• \Under the plain meaning rule statutes ordinarily apply to unforeseen developments unless such application would lead to an absurd result.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Reda Pump Co., a Div. of TRW, Inc. v. Finck
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 1986-07-03· cited 42×
• Myers v. Hayes International Corp.
  M.D. Tennessee· 1988-11-18· cited 17×
• Ashbaugh v. Williams
  New Mexico Supreme Court· 1987-12-18· cited 12×
• Harrigan v. Ford Motor Co.
  Michigan Court of Appeals· 1987-05-04· cited 11×
• Sexton ex rel. Sexton v. Bell Helmets, Inc.
  Fourth Circuit· 1991-02-05· cited 9×
• Chad Sexton v. Bell Helmets, Inc.
  Fourth Circuit· 1991-02-26· cited 6×
• Kanawha Steel & Equipment Co. v. Dorsey Trailers, Inc.
  E.D. Kentucky· 1987-06-08· cited 3×