C.J.M. v. C.L.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that statutory defects, such as internal inconsistencies, are not dispositive in favor of respondent-especially if consequences would clearly contravene broader purposes of statutory scheme
• “we read each statute in a manner that will not thwart its intended purpose” [internal quotation marks omitted]
• \the legislature is always presumed to have created a harmonious and consistent body of law\ [internal quotation marks omitted]
• “the legislature is always presumed to have created a harmonious and consistent body of law” [internal quotation marks omitted]
• \there is no one canon of statutory construction that trumps all others\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).