Byerly Ex Rel. Estate of Byerly v. Connor

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the words of a regulation must be given their plain and ordinary meaning without resort to subtle or forced construction to limit or expand the regulation’s operation
• recognizing that party’s legal duty may be limited to the circumstances surrounding its actions
• stating summary judgment is appropriate when “plain, palpable, and indisputable facts exist on which reasonable minds cannot differ”
• stating an appellate court will give a regulation’s terms their plain and ordinary meaning and may not resort to a forced interpretation to limit or expand the regulation’s operation
• finding defendant had no duty to inspect for a latent defect because he had “undertaken a limited duty to use due care to discover structural nonconformity with permits” only (emphasis added)
• “The words of a regulation must be given their plain and ordinary meaning without resort to subtle or forced construction to limit or expand the regulations operation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).