Sharpe v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System

How courts have described this case

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

• determining whether an administrative rule and agency policy “unlawfully restrict[ed] the statutory grant of coverage”
• holding a regulation invalid that conflicted with an applicable statute
• “One of the primary principles of statutory interpretation is not to construe statutes to give an absurd result”
• “Under the statutory interpretive principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius, when the legislature makes a requirement in one provision of the statute but does not include it in another, we assume the absence of the requirement was intentional.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).