Ray Bell Construction Co. v. School District

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that courts ordinarily will reject a proposed statutory meaning \when to accept it would lead to a result so plainly absurd that it could not possibly have been intended by the Legislature or would defeat the plain legislative intention\
• stating that courts ordinarily will reject a proposed statutory meaning “when to accept it would lead to a result so plainly absurd that it could not possibly have been intended by the Legislature or would defeat the plain legislative intention”
• “Where the terms of the statute are clear, the court must apply those terms according to their literal meaning.”
• “If possible, the court will construe the statute so as to escape the absurdity and carry the [legislature’s] intention into effect.”
• courts will reject ordinary meaning of statutory language, “[h] owe ver plain,” if “to accept it would lead to a result so plainly absurd that it could not possibly have been intended by the Legislature or would defeat the plain legislative intention”
• “[a]ll rules of statutory construction are subservient to the one that the legislative intent must prevail if it can be reasonably discovered in the language used, and that language must be construed in light of the intended purpose of the statute”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).