When harmonizing two statutes relating to the same subject, can a particular or specific statute take precedence over a conflicting general statute?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Spriesterbach v. Holland, 155 Cal.Rptr.3d 306, 215 Cal.App.4th 255 (Cal. App. 2013):
We do not agree. It is a well-settled principle of statutory interpretation that when harmonizing two statutes relating to the same subject, a particular or specific statute will take precedence over a conflicting general statute. [Citation.] ( Thorpe v. Reed (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1381, 1393, 150 Cal.Rptr.3d 454.) Section 21200, which sets out general principles governing
[215 Cal.App.4th 271]
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
Other Questions
Does a statute on a particular subject omits a particular provision in another statute concerning a related matter? (California, United States of America)
Does the specific general rule need to be interpreted as a specific-general rule? (California, United States of America)
Is a later, more specific statute controlling over an earlier statute, even though the later statute would by its terms cover the present situation? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between a general statute and a specific statute? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between a specific statute and a general statute? (California, United States of America)
Is Proposition 8 a single subject subject to the single subject rule? (California, United States of America)
Is there any conflict between a general and a special statute? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General have any authority to charge the jury on how to relate the evidence of that defense to the prosecution's general burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Does a general release specifically exclude any malpractice claims against the attorney from the general release? (California, United States of America)
Is it a federal error that crime requires general not specific intent rather than specific intent? (California, United States of America)
