Getselevich v. Ornstein

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that under an employer’s bona fide seniority system, there can be no Title VII liability even if the current system perpetuates pre-Title VII lawful discrimination
• holding that courts \assume 'that the legislative purpose is expressed by the ordinary meaning of the words used'\ (quoting Richards v. United States, 396 U.S. 1, 9 (1962))
• holding that a Court must interpret a statute according to its plain terms
• explaining that ―[s]tatutes should be interpreted to avoid untenable distinctions and unreasonable results whenever possible‖
• explaining that “[statutes should be interpreted to avoid untenable distinctions and unreasonable results whenever possible”
• noting that statutory interpretation 14 UNITED STATES v. JONES should \avoid untenable distinctions and unreasonable results when- ever possible\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).