Washington Supreme Court· 8/9/1979
State v. Burke
Citations
- 598 P.2d 395
- 92 Wash. 2d 474
- 1979 Wash. LEXIS 1416
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- ruling that \[i]t is an established rule of statutory construction that absurd results should be avoided\
- ruling that “[i]t is an established rule of statutory construction that absurd results should be avoided”
- primary task of court in statutory construction is to ascertain purpose of statute and avoid unlikely, absurd or strained consequences
- where regulation contained a number, the mere reading of which disclosed an error, court gave effect to the intent of drafter
- primary task of court in statutory construction is to ascertain purpose of statute and avoid unlikely, absurd or strained consequences
- rule of statutory construction that absurd or unlikely result be avoided
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Rosellini, Utter, Wright, Brachtenbach, Horowitz, Dolliver, Hicks, Williams, Bever, Tern
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
44 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- National Electrical Contractors Ass'n v. RivelandWashington Supreme Court· 1999-06-03· cited 139×
- Multicare Medical Center v. Department of Social & Health ServicesWashington Supreme Court· 1990-04-26· cited 122×
- Cannon v. Department of LicensingWashington Supreme Court· 2002-08-01· cited 94×
- Geschwind v. FlanaganWashington Supreme Court· 1993-07-15· cited 85×
- Overlake Hospital Ass'n v. Department of HealthWashington Supreme Court· 2010-09-23· cited 59×
- State v. DayWashington Supreme Court· 1981-12-24· cited 57×
- Overlake Hosp. Ass'n v. DEPT. OF HEALTHWashington Supreme Court· 2010-09-23· cited 57×
- City of Seattle v. AllisonWashington Supreme Court· 2002-12-12· cited 50×
- State v. HartleyCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1985-08-29· cited 42×
- In Re Detention of MartinWashington Supreme Court· 2008-05-01· cited 42×
- In re the Detention of MartinWashington Supreme Court· 2008-05-01· cited 42×
- D.W. Close Co. v. Department of Labor & IndustriesCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2008-02-11· cited 32×
- Daviscourt v. PeistrupCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1985-04-24· cited 31×
- DW Close Co., Inc. v. DEPT. OF LABOR AND INDUS.Court of Appeals of Washington· 2008-02-11· cited 30×
- City of Kent v. BeighWashington Supreme Court· 2001-10-11· cited 30×
- Amalgamated Transit Union Legislative Council v. StateWashington Supreme Court· 2002-02-14· cited 29×
- State v. AlbrightCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2008-05-13· cited 17×
- State v. FranklinCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1986-12-04· cited 16×
- Watkins v. Peterson Enterprises, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1999-04-01· cited 16×
- Farina v. Department of HealthCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1999-03-02· cited 15×
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- United States v. WashingtonW.D. Washington· 1974-02-12· cited 191×
- Blondheim v. StateWashington Supreme Court· 1975-01-02· cited 80×
- Alderwood Water District v. Pope & Talbot, Inc.Washington Supreme Court· 1963-06-13· cited 75×
- Hayes v. YountWashington Supreme Court· 1976-07-15· cited 66×
- Puget Sound Gillnetters Ass'n v. MoosWashington Supreme Court· 1977-06-09· cited 29×
- Purse Seine Vessel Owners Ass'n v. MoosWashington Supreme Court· 1977-07-21· cited 18×
- Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n v. TollefsonWashington Supreme Court· 1977-11-23· cited 16×
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.