![owly meaning owly meaning](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_nuBk6FBCHZ0/S-7dVYef-6I/AAAAAAAAAKk/bmiJeTyyxIo/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/FCBD+Owly.jpg)
Under the absurdity doctrine, American courts have interpreted statutes contrary to their plain meaning in order to avoid absurd legal conclusions. The doctrine of absurdity holds that commonsense interpretations should be preferred in such cases, rather than literal readings.
![owly meaning owly meaning](https://64.media.tumblr.com/13305549ce6651601adb4e38e2368177/tumblr_papiai9fwU1sbzg6yo1_1280.jpg)
In law, strictly literal interpretations of statutes can lead to seemingly absurd results. In fact, words are imprecise, leading justices to impose their own prejudices to determine the meaning of a statute.įurther information: Doctrine of absurdity and Strict constructionism Opponents of the plain meaning rule claim that the rule rests on the erroneous assumption that words have a fixed meaning. As there is always the danger that a particular interpretation may be the equivalent of making law, some judges prefer to adhere to the law's literal wording. This is the oldest of the rules of construction and is still used today, primarily because judges may not legislate. It can help to provide for consistency in interpretation. Therefore, it is argued, extrinsic evidence should not be allowed to vary the words used by the testator or their meaning. In probate law the rule is also favored because the testator is typically not around to indicate what interpretation of a will is appropriate. They also point out that ordinary people and lawyers do not have extensive access to secondary sources. Proponents of the plain meaning rule claim that it prevents courts from taking sides in legislative or political issues. In the United Kingdom, this is referred to as the golden rule. I have been willing, in the case of civil statutes, to acknowledge a doctrine of "scrivener's error" that permits a court to give an unusual (though not unheard-of) meaning to a word which, if given its normal meaning, would produce an absurd and arguably unconstitutional result. Even the most vocal supporters of textualism and the plain meaning rule have been willing to commute "strict" plain meaning to "soft" plain meaning to a certain extent, in some circumstances see, e.g. For example, see Rector, Holy Trinity Church v. This is sometimes termed the soft plain meaning rule, where the statute is interpreted according to the ordinary meaning of the language, unless the result would be cruel or absurd. White (1924) marked the beginning of the looser American Rule that the intent of the law was more important than its text. Justices normally impose an absurdity limit on this rule, which states that a statute cannot be interpreted literally if it would lead to an absurd result. So the plain meaning of a legal text is something like the meaning that would be understood by competent speakers of the natural language in which the text was written who are within the intended readership of the text and who understand that the text is a legal text of a certain type.
Owly meaning manual#
A text that means one thing in a legal context, might mean something else if it were in a technical manual or a novel.
![owly meaning owly meaning](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/fe/ee/6c/feee6cf4c3bb93f11e0cdb5e63c34b4d.jpg)
Some laws are meant for all citizens (e.g., criminal statutes) and some are meant only for specialists (e.g., some sections of the tax code). Larry Solum, Professor of Law at Georgetown University, expands on this premise: The literal rule is what the law says instead of what the law was intended to say. If the words are clear, they must be applied, even though the intention of the legislator may have been different or the result is harsh or undesirable. The plain meaning rule attempts to guide courts faced with litigation that turns on the meaning of a term not defined by the statute, or on that of a word found within a definition itself.Īccording to the plain meaning rule, absent a contrary definition within the statute, words must be given their plain, ordinary and literal meaning.
![owly meaning owly meaning](https://66.media.tumblr.com/076d24678cd2b6241587e9fb03acd93c/tumblr_oplhm2O56A1sbzg6yo1_1280.png)
But some statutes omit a definitions section entirely, or (more commonly) fail to define a particular term. To avoid ambiguity, legislatures often include "definitions" sections within a statute, which explicitly define the most important terms used in that statute.