Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3671 - 3680 of 20877 for word.

[PDF] Frontsheet
if it does not "directly contravene[] the words of the statute," is not "clearly contrary to legislative
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=214793 - 2018-08-29

[PDF]
, certain “words and phrases . . . shall be construed as indicated unless such construction would produce
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=976935 - 2025-06-27

State v. Paul J. Stuart
, the importance of John's preliminary hearing testimony is reflected in the action and words of the prosecutor
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17868 - 2005-04-20

[PDF] Tommy G. Thompson v. Terrance L. Craney
, the court turns to three sources in determining the provision's meaning: the plain meaning of the words
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17048 - 2017-09-21

State v. Colleen E. Hansen
to mean the crime as defined by its statutory elements. In other words, the State maintains that § 961.45
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17512 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Joseph A. Lombard
of statutory interpretation is to give effect to the plain meaning of the words in the statute. State ex
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16452 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
conclude that, in the words of § 805.18(2), “the error complained of has [not] affected [Judson’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=717354 - 2023-10-19

Tommy G. Thompson v. Terrance L. Craney
the provision's meaning: the plain meaning of the words in the context used; the constitutional debates
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17048 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Frontsheet
reasonable effect to every word, in order to avoid surplusage." Id., ¶46.8 ¶14 The question of whether
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=320032 - 2021-02-15

[PDF] State v. Paul J. Stuart
articulated alternative wording. See, e.g., Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1, 2-3 (1999); State v. Weed
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17868 - 2017-09-21