Brinkerhoff v. Forsyth

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that if “statutory language is plain and unambiguous, this Court will not look beyond the same to divine legislative intent”
• holding that if “statutory language is plain and unambiguous, this Court will not look beyond the same to divine legislative intent”
• stating “[w]here statutory language is plain and unambiguous, this Court will not look beyond the same to divine legislative intent. Rather, we are guided by the rule that a statute should generally be construed according to its plain language.”
• “Where statutory language is plain and unambiguous, this Court will not look beyond the same to divine legislative intent.”
• when “statutory language is plain and unambiguous, this court will not look beyond the same to divine legislative intent”
• “[Wjhere statutory language is plain and unambiguous, this Court will not look beyond the same to divine legislative intent.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).