The Avoidance of Conflicts Canon

Do not interpret a rule in such a way that creates more conflicts that it resolves.


1. Corley V. U.S., 129 S.Ct. 1558 (2009):

“Second, and more fundamentally, (a) cannot prudently be read to create a conflict with (c), not only because it would make (c) superfluous, as explained, but simply because reading (a) that way would create conflicts with so many other rules that the subsection cannot possibly be given its literal scope.”

2. U.S. v. Raynor, 58 S.Ct. 353 (1938):

“A construction that creates an inconsistency should be avoided when a reasonable interpretation can be adopted which will not do violence to the plain words of the act, and will carry out the intention of Congress.”

© 2009-2011 The Rules Lawyers Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha