Rose v. Barbee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the primary source of legislative intent is the language of the statute itself
• stating that the “primary source of legislative intent is, of course, the language of the statute itself’
• reiterating that statutes must be read “so that no word, clause, sentence or phrase is rendered surplusage, superfluous, meaningless, or nugatory” (internal quotation omitted)
• reiterating that statutes must be read “so that no word, clause, sentence or phrase is rendered surplusage, superfluous, meaningless, or nugatory” (internal quotation omitted)
• reiterating that statutes must be read “so that no word, clause, sentence or phrase is rendered surplusage, superfluous, meaningless, or nugatory” (internal quotation omitted)
• interpreting CR § 9-305’s statutory predecessor as “prohibit[ing] only actions aimed at obstructing or impeding a judicial proceeding”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).