Textual Interpretation Flashcards

A criminal statute states: 'Whoever steals money or property of another shall be guilty.' A defendant obtains money by deception but without physically taking it. Is this 'stealing' under the statute?

Answer: No, because 'steals' in its plain sense requires a physical taking without consent

Applying the literal rule, 'steals' typically denotes a physical taking; obtaining by deception may be a separate offense, not captured by the plain meaning of 'steal.'

Which of the following best describes the difference between the mischief rule and the purposive approach to statutory interpretation?

Answer: The mischief rule looks backward to the pre-statute common law problem; the purposive approach looks at the statute's overall aim

The mischief rule (from Heydon's Case) focuses on the defect in prior law the statute remedied, while the purposive approach more broadly seeks the statute's overarching legislative purpose.

An insurance policy covers losses 'caused by fire, flood, or other natural disasters.' A homeowner claims for losses caused by a landslide. Under ejusdem generis, is the claim covered?

Answer: Yes, if a landslide is of the same genus as fire and flood—sudden, natural, catastrophic events

Ejusdem generis limits 'other natural disasters' to the same class as the listed events (fire, flood), and a landslide fits as a sudden, catastrophic natural occurrence.

When courts interpret the word 'shall' in a statute, it is typically read as:

Answer: Mandatory, imposing an obligatory duty

In statutory drafting, 'shall' is a term of obligation and imposes a mandatory duty on the subject of the provision.

A court is interpreting a provision that protects 'consumers.' A small business purchases goods for resale. Is it a 'consumer' under a statute designed to protect weaker parties in transactions?

Answer: No, because a purposive reading of consumer protection legislation excludes commercial buyers making purchases for business use

Consumer protection statutes are purposively interpreted to protect individuals buying for personal use; commercial buyers are generally excluded from the protective scope.

A long and detailed regulatory code ends with the phrase 'and any other similar conduct.' A defendant is charged under this catch-all. Which rule most strongly limits the scope of 'any other similar conduct'?

Answer: Ejusdem generis

Ejusdem generis restricts the catch-all 'any other similar conduct' to the same genus as the specifically listed acts that precede it.

An LNAT reading passage argues that strict textualism leads to better outcomes than purposivism because it constrains judicial discretion. Which of the following is the strongest counterargument?

Answer: Strict textualism can produce absurd or unjust results when language is imprecise or circumstances unforeseen by drafters

The classic critique of strict textualism is that imprecise drafting or changed circumstances can make literal readings produce absurd results that frustrate legislative intent.