Statutory Construction /Interpretation

• Porter v. Green Bd. of Zoning Appeals, (Ohio 2007)

Zoning Ordinance – Statutory Interpretation – Strict Construction

• Ohio Supreme Court

• The Existing Indian Family Exception to the Indian Child Welfare Act: The States' Attempt to Slaughter Tribal Interests in Indian Children

Introduction . I. Enactment of the ICWA . A. Historical Background. B. Congressional Intent . 1. Congressional Findings. 2. Congressional Declaration of Policy. II. The Indian Child Welfare Act. A. Definitions . 1. Who is an Indian?. 2. Who is an Indian Child? . 3. What is an Indian Tribe? . B. When Does the Act Apply?. C. Who Has Jurisdiction?. III. "Existing Indian Family" Exception . A. Introduction. B. Definition . IV. Application of the "Existing Indian Family" Exception-California as a Model . A. Who Has Applied It? . 1. Constitutional Arguments. 2. ICWA Purpose. B. Who Refused to Apply It?. V. Why is It Flawed? . A. Ignoring Tribal Interests. B. Ignoring the Plain Language. 1. What is the Plain Language?. 2. Statutory Interpretation and Construction. C. Perpetuating a Stereoty...

• Louisiana Law Review
• Nbr. 66-3, May 2006

• Morris v. United Ohio Ins. Co., (Ohio 2003)

C. 3937.18; uninsured motorist coverage; uninsured motor vehicle; owned but uninsured; definition of uninsured motor vehicle; statutory construction; harmonize inconsistencies; give effect to legislative intent; summary judgment; statutory interpretation.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Construction Contracting

Also in response to the prequalification, AICI-SP indicated that it was not part of a joint venture.27 The GAO sustained Caddell's protest as the DOS decision that AICI-SP qualified as a U.S. Person lacked a rational basis.28 The GAO recommended that the DOS reconsider its determination, better document its decision, and if the DOS should determine that additional information is needed, ensure that such information is sought in accordance with procedural requirements.29 Following the GAO decision, the DOS requested additional information from AICI-SP to verify its eligibility for the contract award.30 AICI-SP then indicated that it was a de facto joint venturer with American International Contractors, Inc. (AICI), and the DOS then affirmed its earlier decision to award the contract to A...

....33 The GAO then analyzed a final statutory provision in the Security Act-the requirement that...

• Army Lawyer, The
• Nbr. 1/2008, January 2008

• State ex rel. Overholser Builders, L.L.C. v. Clark Cty. Bd. of Commrs., (Ohio 2007)

Board of County Commissioners sought dismissal of a petition for a writ of mandamus on the ground that mandamus relief is not available for annexation proceedings under R.C. 709.022, the expedited annexation procedure when all parties consent to the annexation. Although a reading of all of the expedited annexations procedures in pari materia would suggest that the Ohio General Assembly has authorized a mandamus action under R.C. 709.023 alone, such a reading would create a right without a remedy, contrary to Section 16, Article I of the Ohio Constitution. The “in pari materia” rule of statutory construction may not lead to an unconstitutional interpretation of a statute. R.C. 709.022 thus implicitly includes a right to seek relief through a writ of mandamus. Motion denied.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Negusie v. Holder, 555 U. S. ____ (2009)

... the word’s inclusion in a related statutory subsection. 449 U. S., at 512. Because Congress di... the inapplicability of the statutory construction principle invoked in Fedorenko, as well as a failu...

• U.S. Supreme Court

• The Polymorphic Principle and the Judicial Role in Statutory Interpretation

In the clash among interpretive methods, the textualists recently won another battle. Not only did Justice Scalia convince the Supreme Court to resolve a case on textualist grounds, he convinced six other Justices to join an opinion stating that a particular textualist rule of statutory construction is so strong that it must always apply. The case, Clark v Martinez, turned on the question of whether a single term in a single statutory provision must always have a single meaning. The Supreme Court erred both descriptively and normatively in Clark v Martinez. It is an error to believe that the process of statutory interpretation can ever be mechanized or reduced to a set of determinate, nondiscretionary rules. Any attempt to do so is likely to provide only the illusion of objectivity whil...

• Texas Law Review
• Vol. 84 Nbr. 2, December 2005

• The interpretation-construction distinction.

...Statutory interpretation yields the linguistic meaning of st...

• Constitutional Commentary
• Vol. 27 Nbr. 1, September 2010

• Chevron's foundation.

... that the foundation is in an implicit statutory prescription and the intent-based inquiry to which... well accepted tools of statutory construction, and thereby avoid serious blame without invoking ...

• Notre Dame Law Review
• Vol. 86 Nbr. 1, February 2011

• Gonzales, Attorney General, Et Al. v. Oregon Et Al., 546 U. S. (2006)

... in Auer, which gave specificity to a statutory scheme the Secretary of Labor was charged with enf... definition and open to varying constructions, and thus ambiguous in the relevant sense. Chevro...

• U.S. Supreme Court