Kingsley v. Hawthorne Fabrics, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that an administrative regulation which is inconsistent with the ordinary and primary meaning of a statute's language should be disregarded
• stating that an administrative agency may not extend the language of a tax statute to tax persons not intended to be taxed
• invalidating Division of Taxation regulation defining “immediate family” as inconsistent with enabling statute, noting that “if the regulation attempts to add to the statute something which is not there, it can furnish no sustenance to the statute”
• invalidating Division of Taxation regulation defining “immediate family” as inconsistent with enabling statute, noting that “if the regulation attempts to add to the statute something which is not there, it can furnish no sustenance to the statute”
• “An administrative agency may not ... give [a] statute any greater effect than its language allows.”
• \An administrative agency may not . . . give [a] statute any greater effect than its language allows.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).