Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 27 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from State v. Prater.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Prater Anchor | green | “we are obliged to suppose that the general assembly chose the language it did for a reason.” | 11 |
| 2 | Curley v. LAKE CTY BD. OF ELECTIONS REGIS. | green | “in interpreting a statute, we must consider not only what the statute says but what it does not say.” | 7 |
| 3 | State v. Prater | green | “we review the statute as a whole and presume the legislature intended logical application of the language used in the statute, so as to avoid unjust or absurd results.” | 5 |
| 4 | Curley v. LAKE CTY BD. OF ELECTIONS REGIS. | green | “if a statute is unambiguous, that is, susceptible to but one meaning, we must give the statute its clear and plain meaning.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.