Hirschfield v. Cohen (2022)

Citation: Hirschfield v. Cohen (2022)
Parent Document: Hirschfield v. Cohen (2022)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2022-08-25
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7859842/hirschfield-v-cohen/ ↗

Full Text

845 chars

12
rules.’” (Apartment Association, supra, 173 Cal.App.4th at p. 21;
accord, Moore v. Superior Court of Riverside County (2020)
58 Cal.App.5th 561, 574.)
       “‘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.’” (Jarman,
supra, 10 Cal.5th at p. 381.) However, “[i]f the relevant statutory
language is ambiguous, we look to appropriate extrinsic sources,
including the legislative history, for further insights.” (McHugh,
supra, 12 Cal.5th at p. 227; accord, Mendoza v. Fonseca McElroy
Grinding Co., Inc. (2021) 11 Cal.5th 1118, 1125 [“‘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.’”].)

Other Sections in This Document (50)

Full Text