Thomas v. Department of Developmental Services

How courts have described this case

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

• silence as to scope of provision rendered statute ambiguous with respect to its scope because there was more than one plausible interpretation
• statutory provision can- not be ‘‘interpreted in a vacuum, without reference to the statute’s other provisions’’
• statutory provision cannot be ‘‘interpreted in a vacuum, without reference to the statute’s other provisions’’
• ‘‘[w]e are not in the business of writing statutes; that is the province of the legislature’’ [internal quotation marks omitted]
• courts are not in business of writing statutes, as that is province of legislature, and role of courts is to interpret statutes as written
• statutory “provision [cannot] be interpreted in a vacuum, without reference to the statute’s other pro- visions”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).