Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 71 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. Orange County Employees Retirement System Board of Directors.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Freedom Newspapers, Inc. v. Orange County Employees Retirement System Board of Directors Anchor | green | “when interpreting a statute our primary task is to determine the legislature's intent. in doing so we turn first to the statutory language, since the words the legislature chose are the best indicators of its intent.” | 40 |
| 2 | Lungren v. Deukmejian | green | “the intent prevails over the letter, and the letter will, if possible, be so read as to conform to the spirit of the act. an interpretation that renders related provisions nugatory must be avoided ; each sentence must be read not in isolation but in light of the statutory scheme…” | 12 |
| 3 | Mercer v. Department of Motor Vehicles | green | “if the language is clear and unambiguous there is no need for construction, nor is it necessary to resort to indicia of the intent of the legislature (in the case of a statute) . . . .” | 7 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.