How have courts used statutory construction aids to determine legislative intent?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Stewart v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance, 143 Cal.Rptr. 641, 80 Cal.App.3d 172 (Cal. App. 1978):
In statutory construction various aids to determine legislative intent have been utilized by courts since "it is a cardinal rule that statutes should be given a reasonable interpretation and in accordance with the apparent purpose and intention of the law makers." (County of Alameda v. Kuchel (1948) 32 Cal.2d 193, 199, 195 P.2d 17, 20.) In so doing, the court is entitled to
Page 647
"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
What is the test for determining the intent of the legislative body in the construction of statutory language? (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)
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)
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 deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for establishing that language is sufficient to require the construction of a statutory definition for the purpose of establishing that a section of law does not need to include the words "constant construction" in its construction? (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)
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (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)
Does a juvenile court hearing determine whether a minor should be tried as an adult prior to a determination that the minor's guilt should be determined? (California, United States of America)
How have courts treated criticism of legislation in the context of legislation being challenged in the courts? (California, United States of America)
