Durgin v. Colburn

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that CMRS providers are telephone companies because they “use their assets to provide a service whereby persons who are at some distance from each other may communicate by voice in real time”
• concluding that CMRS providers are telephone companies because they “use their assets to provide a service whereby persons who are at some distance from each other may communicate by voice in real time”
• stating the basic rule of statutory construction that absent an ambiguity, a statute must be construed just as it reads, giving the words their ordinary and usually accepted meaning in common language

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).