California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Trolan v. Trolan, 243 Cal.Rptr.3d 264, 31 Cal.App.5th 939 (Cal. App. 2019):
The cases Appellants cite in support of their argument do not alter our analysis. Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP (2008) 44 Cal.4th 937, 81 Cal.Rptr.3d 282, 189 P.3d 285 does not explicitly concern application of the specific-general rule; the language Appellants quote from that opinion does not provide sufficient support for their argument.9 While In re P.A. (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 23, 149 Cal.Rptr.3d 300, a juvenile justice case, did involve the specific-general rule, it similarly does not require us to find the trial courts application of that rule revealed an
[243 Cal.Rptr.3d 277]
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.