Cook v. Com.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “our case law uses the phrase ‘absurd result’ to describe situations in which the law would be internally inconsistent”
• noting that “our case law uses the phrase ‘absurd result’ to describe situations in which the law would be internally inconsistent”
• noting that Virginia \case law uses the phrase 'absurd result' to describe situations in which the law would be internally inconsistent or otherwise incapable of operation\
• noting that Virginia “case law uses the phrase ‘absurd result’ to describe situations in which the law would be internally inconsistent or otherwise incapable of operation”
• ‘Words in a statute should be interpreted, if possible, to avoid rendering words superfluous.”
• “Words in a statute should be interpreted, if possible, to avoid rendering words superfluous.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).