Graham v. Dokter Trucking Group

How courts have described this case

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

• finding the Court of Appeals’ interpretation of the workers compensation statute, leading it to a conclusion unforeseen by the claimant, did not render the panel’s action inappropriate
• relying on doctrine of operative construction in context of question of law on undisputed facts
• “If the statute’s language is clear, there is no need to resort to statutory construction.”
• \[Wage loss] is simply calculated by the factfinder based on the difference between the preinjury weekly wage and the postinjury weekly wage.\
• “The Court of Appeals erred in overlooking the import of this plain language in the statute, instead attempting to divine legislative intent from a review of legislative history.”
• agency's interpretation of statute not binding on court; although persuasive, not conclusive

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).