California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Balliet Bros. Constr. Corp. v. Regents of University of California, 145 Cal.Rptr. 498, 80 Cal.App.3d 321 (Cal. App. 1978):
The indicated construction of section 4201 also avoids any ostensible disparity with sections 4203 and 4205. It thus comports with the settled canons of statutory interpretation which require that all parts of an enactment must be "harmonized . . . in the context of the statutory framework as a whole" (Moyer v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd. (1973) 10 Cal.3d 222, 230-231, 110 Cal.Rptr. 144, 148, 514 P.2d 1224, 1229) and "that where there are conflicting provisions, the one susceptible to only one meaning will control the one that is susceptible of two meanings, if the statute can thereby be made harmonious." (REA Enterprises v. California Coastal Zone Conservation Com. (1975) 52 Cal.App.3d 596, 610, 125 Cal.Rptr. 201, 211.)
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.