Plain Meaning Rule

How to read and figure out the law or Insurance Policy Provisions – Evidence of Coverage

  • Read the Statute – Policy
  • Read the Statute – Policy
  • Read the Statute – Policy
  • Then when you think you understand it, read it again
The language of the text of the statute or  Evidence of Coverage  should serve as the starting point for any inquiry into its meaning.    To properly understand and interpret a statute, [first] you must read the text closely, keeping in mind that your initial understanding of the text may not be the only plausible interpretation of the statute or even the correct one, per Justice Felix Frankfurter . Guide to Reading & Interpreting  *  American Society of Healthcare Risk Management    and * Wikipedia.

The starting point in statutory construction is the language of the statute – Evidence of Coverage itself. The Supreme Court often recites the “plain meaning rule,”  as in, King vs Burwell Subsidies in Health Care.Gov upheld, that, if the language of the statute is clear, there is no need to look outside the statute to its legislative history in order to ascertain the statute’s meaning.

Parol Evidence Rule Wikipedia – Contract stands by itself – can’t bring up discussions or agreements that were prior to actually signing the written Contract

The plain meaning of the contract will be followed where the words used—whether written or oral—have a clear and unambiguous meaning. Words are given their ordinary meaning; technical terms are given their technical meaning; and local, cultural, or Trade Usage of terms are recognized as applicable. The circumstances surrounding the formation of the contract are also admissible to aid in the interpretation.  West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.

A cardinal rule of construction is that a statute should be read as a

Harmonious Whole,

with its various parts being interpreted within their broader statutory context in a manner that furthers statutory purposes.  A provision that may seem ambiguous in isolation is often clarified by the remainder of the statutory scheme — because the same terminology is used elsewhere in a context that makes its meaning clear, or because only one of the permissible meanings produces a substantive effect that is compatible with the rest of the law.”

In Edgar v. MITE Corp., 457 U.S. 624 (1982), the Supreme Court ruled: “A state statute is void to the extent that it actually conflicts with a valid Federal statute.” In effect, this means that a State law will be found to violate the supremacy clause when either of the following two conditions (or both) exist:[3]

  1. Compliance with both the Federal and State laws is impossible, or
  2. “…state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress…”

Supreme Court – FINAL Ruling – Plain Meaning – No Jiggery Pokery 47 Pages, view our highlights, annotations & bookmarks

President Trump
Health Care is VERY complicated
He should have asked me

King v Burwell – Subsidies Upheld – ScotusCare –
Plain Meaning Rule – Interpretive Jiggery Pokery

Justice Scalia Jiggery Pokery

More on Jiggery Pokery

The

doctrine of privity in contract law

provides that a contract cannot confer rights or impose obligations arising under it on any person or agent except the parties to it.

The premise is that only parties to contracts should be able to sue to enforce their rights or claim damages as such. However, the doctrine has proven problematic due to its implications upon contracts made for the benefit of third parties who are unable to enforce the obligations of the contracting parties. en.wikipedia.org

 In tort law, a duty of care is a legal obligation imposed on an individual requiring that they adhere to a standard of reasonable care while performing any acts that could foreseeably harm others. It is the first element that must be established to proceed with an action in negligence. The plaintiff must be able to show a duty of care imposed by law which the defendant has breached. In turn, breaching a duty may subject an individual to liability in tort. The duty of care may be imposed by operation of law between individuals with no current direct relationship (familial or contractual or otherwise), but eventually become related in some manner, as defined by common law (meaning case law). wikipedia.org/

Elements

the foreseeability of harm to the injured party;
the degree of certainty he or she suffered injury;
the closeness of the connection between the defendant’s conduct and the injury suffered;
the moral blame attached to the defendant’s conduct;
the policy of preventing future harm;
the extent of the burden to the defendant and the consequences to the community of imposing a duty of care with resulting liability for breach;
and the availability, cost, and prevalence of insurance for the risk involved.[6]
  the social utility of the defendant’s conduct from which the injury arose.[7]wikipedia.org/

One comment on “Plain Meaning Rule – Read the statute 3 times

Leave a Reply to Steve Shorr Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.