Skip to main content

Maddox v. State

Citations

  • 923 So. 2d 442
  • 2006 WL 59332

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a \literal interpretation should not be adhered to when it would lead to absurd results\
  • holding that a “literal interpretation should not be adhered to when it would lead to absurd results”
  • holding statute prohibiting introduction of traffic citations “in any trial” limited to any trial dealing directly with the traffic offense
  • holding statute prohibiting introduction of traffic citations “in any trial” limited to any trial dealing directly with the traffic offense
  • noting that a literal interpretation of a statute should not be adhered to when it would lead to an absurd or unreasonable result
  • noting that a literal interpretation of a statute should not be adhered to when it would lead to an absurd or unreasonable result

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

40 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.