<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Statutory interpretation for nine-year-olds	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/07/statutory-interpretation-for-nine-year-olds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/07/statutory-interpretation-for-nine-year-olds/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Jul 2009 23:22:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: VMS		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/07/statutory-interpretation-for-nine-year-olds/comment-page-1/#comment-53482</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[VMS]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Jul 2009 23:22:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12087#comment-53482</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The case of Regina v. Ojabway is the classic case of statutory interpretation. 

http://community.boredofstudies.org/331/law/47101/literal-rule-statutory-interpretation.html

It is a fictitious case written by two Havard Law professors for the Criminal Law Quarterly, and it appears in many law school texts (See e.g. Property by Casner and Leach)

The problem with such humor pieces is that the courts sometimes don&#039;t see them as humor and  cite and quote them as if they were real cases. The Second Circuit did this in US v Byrnes 644 F.2d 107 (2d Cir 1981) 

http://www.hosteny.com/funcases/byrnes.html]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The case of Regina v. Ojabway is the classic case of statutory interpretation. </p>
<p><a href="http://community.boredofstudies.org/331/law/47101/literal-rule-statutory-interpretation.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://community.boredofstudies.org/331/law/47101/literal-rule-statutory-interpretation.html</a></p>
<p>It is a fictitious case written by two Havard Law professors for the Criminal Law Quarterly, and it appears in many law school texts (See e.g. Property by Casner and Leach)</p>
<p>The problem with such humor pieces is that the courts sometimes don&#8217;t see them as humor and  cite and quote them as if they were real cases. The Second Circuit did this in US v Byrnes 644 F.2d 107 (2d Cir 1981) </p>
<p><a href="http://www.hosteny.com/funcases/byrnes.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.hosteny.com/funcases/byrnes.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: ps		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/07/statutory-interpretation-for-nine-year-olds/comment-page-1/#comment-53297</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ps]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 06:06:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12087#comment-53297</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I laughed so hard that I spilled my pretzels on the family room floor. I am invoking congressional privilege in order to avoid prosecution. Let my wife argue that one.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I laughed so hard that I spilled my pretzels on the family room floor. I am invoking congressional privilege in order to avoid prosecution. Let my wife argue that one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Patw		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/07/statutory-interpretation-for-nine-year-olds/comment-page-1/#comment-53247</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Patw]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 18:24:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12087#comment-53247</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I believe the apple ruling to be in error and thus the entire record after that is tainted.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe the apple ruling to be in error and thus the entire record after that is tainted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Larry Sheldon		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/07/statutory-interpretation-for-nine-year-olds/comment-page-1/#comment-53243</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Larry Sheldon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:37:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12087#comment-53243</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Agree with Todd, however, in other jurisdictions an implicit recitiation of the &quot;Because I said so.&quot; was usually sufficient.

(Explicit recitation was to be avoided because of its close association with &quot;Go get me a switch from the privet hedge.&quot;)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agree with Todd, however, in other jurisdictions an implicit recitiation of the &#8220;Because I said so.&#8221; was usually sufficient.</p>
<p>(Explicit recitation was to be avoided because of its close association with &#8220;Go get me a switch from the privet hedge.&#8221;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Benjamin		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/07/statutory-interpretation-for-nine-year-olds/comment-page-1/#comment-53241</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Benjamin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12087#comment-53241</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[If you allow the slippery slope to be a precedent, then you can never make any rule that will stick.  In such cases, the legislature should amend the rule immediately to close any loophole.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you allow the slippery slope to be a precedent, then you can never make any rule that will stick.  In such cases, the legislature should amend the rule immediately to close any loophole.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Todd Rogers		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/07/statutory-interpretation-for-nine-year-olds/comment-page-1/#comment-53237</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Todd Rogers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:41:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/?p=12087#comment-53237</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A wise female caucasian judge in my childhood home would have issued a summary judgment on the first infraction (with a wooden spoon) and sent a clear message to the rest of the subjects that such challenges to existing statutes will also be sent to the star chamber in short order thereby rendering all future appeals or interpretations obsolete.  The spoon still hangs on her wall as a reminder, to this very day.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A wise female caucasian judge in my childhood home would have issued a summary judgment on the first infraction (with a wooden spoon) and sent a clear message to the rest of the subjects that such challenges to existing statutes will also be sent to the star chamber in short order thereby rendering all future appeals or interpretations obsolete.  The spoon still hangs on her wall as a reminder, to this very day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
