Cantinca v. Fontana

How courts have described this case

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

• deeming this the “plain meaning” of a statute similarly prohibiting consideration of evidence of a “violation” of a mandatory smoke detector law
• finding the county ordinance and state statute were not impliedly inconsistent because both “explicitly defer[] to the stricter regulation in the event of a conflict”
• referring to state statutes and municipal ordinances as opposed to agency regulations
• “In Delaware, the State and its political subdivisions are permitted to enact similar provisions and regulations, so long as the two regulations do not conflict.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).