Court of Appeals of Maryland· 8/10/2021

Lawrence v. State

Citations

257 A.3d 588
475 Md. 384

How courts have described this case

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

finding that the decision in Lee was not “clearly wrong” because this Court’s decision in Lee “accords with this Court’s fundamental rules of statutory construction”
finding that the decision in Lee was not “clearly wrong” because this Court’s decision in Lee “accords with this Court’s fundamental rules of statutory construction”
finding that the decision in Lee was not “clearly wrong” because this Court’s decision in Lee “accords with this Court’s fundamental rules of statutory construction”
explaining that courts “read the statute as a whole to ensure that no word, clause, sentence or phrase is rendered surplusage, superfluous, meaningless or nugatory” (cleaned up)
explaining that courts “read the statute as a whole to ensure that no word, clause, sentence or phrase is rendered surplusage, superfluous, meaningless or nugatory” (cleaned up)
noting that statutory interpretation “seek[s] to avoid constructions that are illogical, unreasonable, or inconsistent with common sense” (quoting Della Ratta v. Dyas, 414 Md. 556, 567 (2010))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Getty

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

52 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.