Stone v. Instrumentation Laboratory Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that courts will not adopt an interpretation of a statute that leads to an “absurd result”
• noting that courts will not accept an interpretation that would “thwart the statute’s obvious purpose” or “lead to an absurd result”
• “Congress unquestionably has the right to create a complainant-friendly statutory scheme that affords no deference to non- final agency findings.”
• applying de novo review to issues of statutory interpretation
• employee filed lawsuit after appealing ALJ’s adverse decision to ARB
• “Courts will not, however, adopt a ‘literal’ construction of a statute if such interpretation would thwart the statute's obvious purpose or lead to an ‘absurd result.’” (quoting Chesapeake Ranch Water Co. v. Bd. of Comm’rs of Calvert Cnty., 401 F.3d 274, 280 (4th Cir. 2005))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).