5 Cal. 5th 522 - Hassell v. Bird’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
15 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 4101 · 28 U.S.C. § 4102 · 47 U.S.C. § 230 (Communications Decency Act § 230)
Relies on New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · Hansberry v. Lee · Taylor v. Sturgell · Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“' "When we interpret a statute, '[o]ur fundamental task ... is to determine the Legislature's intent so as to effectuate the law's purpose. We first examine the statutory language, giving it a plain and commonsense meaning. We do not examine that language in isolation, but in the context of the statutory framework as a whole in order to determine its scope and purpose and to harmonize the various parts of the enactment. If the language is clear, courts must generally follow its plain meaning unless a literal interpretation would result in absurd consequences the Legislature did not intend. If the statutory language permits more than one reasonable interpretation, courts may consider other aids, such as the statute's purpose, legislative history, and public policy.' [Citation.] 'Furthermore, we consider portions of a statute in the context of the entire statute and the statutory scheme of which it is a part, giving significance to every word, phrase, sentence, and part of an act in pursuance of the legislative purpose.' " ' " ( Hassell v. Bird (2018) 5 Cal.5th 522 , 540, 234 Cal.Rptr.3d 867 , 420 P.3d 776 ; accord, City of San Jose v. Superior Court (2017) 2 Cal.5th 608 , 616-617, 214 Cal.Rptr.3d 274 , 389 P.3d 848 .) 1. The Statutory Language Considered in isolation, the plain language of the three statutes is inconclusive. The statutes provide a director "may bring”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“'We consider portions of a statute in the context of the entire statute and the statutory scheme of which it is a part, giving significance to every word, phrase, sentence, and part of an act in pursuance of the legislative purpose.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.