John E. Rodarte v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• referring to such a procedural right and explaining that the plaintiffs allegation that the debt collector violated § 1692f(8
• discussing how courts should avoid statutory interpretations that cause words “to duplicate another provision or to have no consequence” (quoting Nielsen v. Preap, 586 U.S. 392, 414 (2019))
• “[i]f the language of the statute is clear, the court applies the statute as written”
• “If the language of the statute is clear, the court applies the statute as written.” (citation modified)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).