How do courts interpret the law and what are the sources used to determine the construction of a statute?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Garcia, H042014, H043552 (Cal. App. 2017):
extrinsic sources, including the ostensible objects to be achieved and the legislative history.' [Citation.] Ultimately we choose the construction that comports most closely with the apparent intent of the lawmakers, with a view to promoting rather than defeating the general purpose of the statute. [Citations.]" ' [Citation.]" (People v. Gutierrez (2014) 58 Cal.4th 1354, 1369.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
When a section of the California Civil Code provides for construction of a statute, how do courts interpret the construction of the statute? (California, United States of America)
Does section 125.3 of the California Code of Civil Procedure apply to the construction of the statute, and if so, does the court have jurisdiction to interpret the interpretation of the law? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 1016.5 of the California Immigration Code and how have the courts interpreted the word 'court' in that section? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, does the appellate court have power to substitute its factual determination for that factual determination? (California, United States of America)
If a statutory language does not yield a plain meaning, and the legislative history of the legislation is not to be considered in determining the meaning of the statute, can a court rely on the statute itself? (California, United States of America)
Is section 1001.36 of the California Criminal Code a "stressed interpretation" of the law and, if so, would it be impertinent for the court to place a strained interpretation upon the statute? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the plain meaning of a statute in the context of construction? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the rule that prior determination is not conclusive either if injustice would result or if the public interest requires that the prior determination not to be foreclosed? (California, United States of America)
When an agency adopts a new interpretation of a statute and rejects an old interpretation of the statute? (California, United States of America)
