200 likes | 877 Views
Statutory Analysis. The Relationship with Case Law Techniques of Interpretation. Statutory law. When researching a legal problem, where do you begin if there is no applicable Constitutional provision ?
E N D
Statutory Analysis The Relationship with Case Law Techniques of Interpretation
Statutory law • When researching a legal problem,where do you begin if there is no applicable Constitutional provision ? • Remember that state legislatures and other administrative bodies as well as the United States Congress may enact statutes.
The Relationship Between Case Law and Statutes • Courts may… • 1) Determine if legislative acts are constitutional or enacted under valid powers • 2) and create case law to determine how a statute is to be interpreted or applied.
The Relationship Between Statutes and Case Law • The legislature may… • 1) Pass statuteswhich change thecommon law or • 2) create new statutory causes of action which were not available at common law.
Statutory Interpretation • Statutory language may be intentionally vague in order to allow for judicial discretion (i.e. reasonable use) • What do you do when there is no binding case law construing the language of a statute relevant to your problem?
Judges interpret statutes by considering the following: • 1) The text itself (plain language); • 2) legislative intent; • 3) implicated policies; • 4) interpretation of any governmental agencies; • 5) or opinions of respected commentators.
“Plain Language” • Plain language/meaning is determined by: • ordinary, dictionary language; • by definition sections in a statute; • by technical definitions within a trade or industry; • or other uses of the same word in the statute.
Legislative Intent • If the plain language is unclear or if the plain meaning would lead to absurd or unintended results, courts will consider legislative intent by looking at the legislative history. • In addition to predecessor statutes , Legislative History consists of: • Documents that were produced during the statute’s legislative history such as • committee reports, • speeches, • witness testimony and • studies introduced into the record. (State v. Blight revisited)
Canons of Construction • These are also canons or maxims stating customary ways of interpreting statutes. The cannons however, often yield inconclusive results and not often determinative. • 1) Ejusdem generis (of the same genus or class) a specific enumeration followed by a general catch-all; words construed to things of the same character. • 2) Expressio unis, exclusio alterius (expression of one thing excludes another) if a statute mentions what is within its coverage, that which is not mentioned is excluded. • 3) Statutes in pari materia (same subject matter) should be read together. • 4) A penal statute should be strictly construed. • 5) Strictly construe statutes in derogation of the common law; liberally construe remedial statutes. • What if the remedial statute is in derogation of the common law?
Analyzing Statutory Authority • Read the Statute • When reading the statute be sure to consider. . . • To whom is it addressed • What conduct it prohibits/permits • How the parts of the statute relate to each other. • Read the Dog-Bite Act (Handout)
The Parts of a Statute • Purpose Sections (modify/codify common law) • Definition Sections • Operative Language Sections • Effective Date
Analyzing Statutory Authority • The next step is to identify the issuein your case relative to the statute. • Does the statute apply on its face? • If so, identify the elements/analytical categories to determine which have been violated/satisfied.
The Dog Bite Statute • If any dog shall, • without provocation, • bite or injure • any person who is at the time and place where the person has a legal right to be, • the owner of the dog • is liable for the damages • to the person bitten or injured.
After you identify the elements, identify the legal issue. • What is the legal issue(s) when the statute is applied to your set of facts? • Under Ala. Code § 3-6-1 whether . . ..
Outline Your Issue Assuming your issue is whether Mondays is liable as/for… (not the extent of his liability)
Set out § 3-6-1 • Explain Buttercup did bite Douglas without provocation while on Mondays’ property. Thus the two remaining issues are whether Mondays was an “owner” and whether Douglas had a “legal right” to be on the property. • I . The court will likely find Mondays was/was not Buttercup’s owner because . . . • Rule sentence giving definition of owner • Case Discussion of Humphries Will discuss- Counter-arguments Mini-conclusion • II. The court will likely find Douglas was/was not legally on Monday’s property because . . . • Set out § 3-6-2 Will discuss Counter-arguments Mini-conclusion