Walzer v. Osborne

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that dismissal without prejudice was the appropriate remedy for failure to attach the expert report to the Certificate
• explaining that the statute makes \clear that the General Assembly intended for the attesting expert report to be a part of the certificate of qualified expert\
• explaining that the statute makes “clear that the General Assembly intended for the attesting expert report to be a part of the certificate of qualified expert”
• explaining that “the General Assembly intended for the attesting expert report to be a part of the certificate of qualified expert and not for the report and certificate to constitute two separate and distinct documents”
• explaining that \the General Assembly intended for the attesting expert report to be a part of the certificate of qualified expert and not for the report and certificate to constitute two separate and distinct documents\
• acknowledging that this Court has extensively employed the negative implication canon in its case law, embodied in the maxim expression unius est exclusion alterius—“to express or include one thing implies the exclusion of the other, or of the alternative”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).