Hill v. Sacka

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that when statutes conflict concerning the allocation of fault, the statute \more specific to the subject matter than the general statutes regarding allocation of fault . . . controls.\
• noting that when statutes conflict concerning the allocation of fault, the statute “more specific to the subject matter than the general statutes regarding allocation of fault ... controls.”
• \[W]e conclude that the dog-bite statute does not allow for consideration of any comparative negligence on the part of the dog-bite victim. ...\
• The use of “any means every and all and suggests the absence of limits altogether.” (internal quotation marks omitted)(emphasis added)
• applying plain meaning rule to statutory construction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).