Congratulations to Gina Axsom of Sinsheimer Juhnke Lebens & McIvor, LLP.  She is LRI’s quarterly winner of the Barnes & Nobles Gift Card!  As always, thank you to all of our clients for choosing LRI to be on your research team.  Your feedback on our survey is greatly appreciated.  We have recently used several client suggestions to improve our reports; our goal is to better assist you in the future.

State Library doings …

The Stanley Mosk State Library and Courts Building located at 914 Capitol Mall will be emptied for renovations and all of the library’s collections and staff will move off site (rumors say West Sacramento, just across the river). The courts will move out in December of this year and the rest of the building’s occupants will move out in January or February 2009 – including Witkin Law Library and  General Circulation.  Expect research slowdowns … 

Our beloved government publications section (GPS) has disappeared.  Their collection is now administered by general circulation (GC).  GPS staff cutbacks accompanying the merger were sad.  GC staff are not yet up to speed on the GPS collections which translates into more research slowdowns.  Give it time…

State Archives online indexing …

State Archives is to be congratulated for working at staying relevant.  It has been incrementally building its online index. So while the actual records are still not available digitally, at least the details of their collections are.   The latest kudos are for the completion of their legislative “accessions” index in Minerva.  (Accessions is where they keep track of the uncatalogued  records that the Legislature sends to them.) They are also making progress on digitally indexing their catalogued records.  This translates into more efficient, faster research… finally! Some good news on that front!

As a child, I was a ferocious reader, often bringing home from the library a stack of books taller than myself, only to return a week later for another round, having devoured every last word at a break-neck pace.  When you go through books at that rate, it’s nearly impossible to continually come up with new authors to read all by yourself.  They say that man’s best friend is his dog.  That may be true, but a book lover’s best friend is a helpful librarian, ready to recommend the next great adventure for your reading enjoyment.

However, in today’s online world, nobody ever walks to the library anymore, let alone has the opportunity to pick to brain of the librarian behind the desk to see what new gems might be available for loan.  But never fear – Google is here!  With their newest site, Librarian’s Book Revoogle, you can read the latest book reviews written by libraries and librarians.  Many are links to blogs, where you can subscribe for continual updates once you find a reviewer you like.

Happy hunting!

William P. Statsky summarizes a useful approach for understanding and applying a statute (see Legislative Analysis and Drafting, 2nd Ed., pp 35-42):

Five interrelated questions must be asked whenever you are trying to understand and apply a statute.

a. What is the “plain meaning” of the language in the statute?  To what extent is the meaning self-evident

b. Why was the statute adopted?  What needs prompted it?  What mischief or evil was the legislature trying to correct?

c. What happened in the legislature during the process of adoption?  What is the statute’s legislative history?

d. What was the law prior to the adoption of the statute?

e. What has happened since the statute was created?  What has been the response of the courts, the agency charged with administering the statute, the legislature, the public, scholars, etc.?

These questions constitute the foundation of the methods of understanding any statute.  The answers to the questions will place the statute in context within the legal system.  Without this context, any application of the statute is on potentially dangerous ground.  [Emphasis added]

To gain an understanding of the changes made to a statute over time, it is most useful to “begin at the beginning,” then to compare the changes in chronological sequence.  When the chaptered laws are organized in such a manner, it allows one to determine when the language of interest first came in and makes it easier to identify any subsequent changes. Comparing the evolution of statutory language can yield vital information regarding the interpretation of a statute.  For example, if the prior law used the word “may” and the subsequent amendment or repeal and recodification used the word “shall” instead, any effort to place a discretionary operation of the statute will face serious a challenge.  This is just one of many examples in which a study of the evolution of a statute can suggest theories of statutory construction and enable one to target enactments for further research regarding legislative intent. 

Remeber the goold old days of VHS and cassette tapes? Yes, they still exist.  And sometimes, they can prove to be invaluable sources of legislative intent that can be found nowhere else.  Although paper files are the standard fare for legislative research, the Legislature will sometimes tape committee and floor deliberations.  Sporadic videotaping began in the Assembly in 1990 and in the Senate in 1992.  Before that, both houses used audio tapes on an equally sporadic basis.  Unfortunately, most of these taped sessions are never transcribed, leaving the audio or VHS tape as the only record of the important discussions and debate.  The true importance of such taped research can be seen most clearly in Senate Bill 899 (2004).

Senator Poochigian was the primary author of major workers’ compensation reforms that were eventually embodied in SB 899, a Senate bill which was enacted as Statutes of 2004, Chapter 34.  The bulk of the language of this bill did not appear until the eleventh hour, when it was in Conference Committee.   As a result, the video-taped debates of the Joint Conference Committee, as well as the approval on the floors of both houses, become an invaluable source of legislative intent.  The video tape research fills in the gaps where the standard paper files fall

If you would like additional information on this often overlooked area of research, please do not hesitate to contact us.  For fee information, feel free to visit our website.

Our main website, www.lrihistory.com, has several pages of complimentary research aids, including research guides, helpful research tips, and links to outside research sources. If you find our resources helpful and would like to link to us, simply copy and paste the code below into the appropriate page on your site. Please contact Lisa Hampton at (800) 530-7613 or intent@lrihistory.com with any questions.

Code: <a href=”http//www.lrihistory.com/”>Legislative Research, Inc.</a>

The California courts take judicial notice of legislative history records that are generated during the course of a bill’s enactment to clarify ambiguous terms (most common usage) and to reinforce a statute’s “plain meaning” (growing trend).  The competent practitioner knows how to identify legislative history records that are reflective of the Legislature’s intent and how to avoid relying upon misleading records that are outdated or otherwise irrelevant. However, the starting point is obtaining a thorough legislative history research report to analyze with your issue in mind.

Unfortunately, this is not easily accomplished for online research sources are limited.  For example, the Legislature’s database of bill versions, analyses and veto messages are only available from 1993 on and do not include all the records that the courts take judicial notice of (e.g., governor enrolled reports, partisan caucus analyses, etc.).  Offline research sources do include these other records, and more, but are difficult to obtain unless you are able to travel to Sacramento, where most of these documents are housed.

Refer to our complete “Complexities” article posted on our Complimentary Resources webpage for all the details.

As a historian, well do I remember my first foray into the secluded vault of the rare book room, which housed priceless primary source documents.  Nothing could have prepared me for the emotions I felt as I travelled back in time, examining page after page of text that was centuries older than I.  The feel of the white cotton gloves on my hands, the smell of ancient parchment in the air, the sight of ornate lettering and intricate illustrations, all colluded to transport me to a long-forgotten age.  It was a magical experience like none other.  Unfortunately, many rare books are so fragile that patrons are not allowed to examine them, regardless of how many precautions against damage are taken.  (Apparently acid free paper wasn’t on the radar “back in the day” – but crumbly/yellowing newsprint was.)

That’s where Google Books comes in.

Granted, searching manuscripts online does not convey the same magical feeling that personally handling ancient documents does, but when a record is so fragile that it cannot be touched, Google Books often times it is the only way to view such texts.  Google Books also comes in handy when the library is closed and you desperately need to find an old treatise or other such work to solidify that winning argument for your case.  Because a great many texts are old enough that they are no longer under copyright protection, Google is able to post the document in its entirety, for viewing, searching, and downloading.

Once such text available in full at Google Books is the Draft of the Civil Code for the State of New York, as prepared by the Commissioners of the Code of 1862.  When California first codified its  laws in 1872, much of it was based on the work of the New York Code Commissioners.  Because this publication is available in full at Google Books online, researchers can access these pages day or night, without fear of ruining fragile pages from a rare and valuable book.  It’s even word searchable.

Another example of a priceless, ancient record now available on Google Books is the three volume set of the 1878 Debates and Proceedings of the Constitutional Convention of the State of California.  Between the word-searchable format and the outstanding index in Volume 3, you can easily and quickly size up how your topic was treated.

The California Law Revision Commission (CLRC) is responsible for reviewing California law in order to identify defects and anachronisms, antiquated language, and terms that should be brought into uniformity with surrounding law, among other things.  It then proposes recommendations to correct such problems.  Many times, the California Legislature adopts the CLRC’s recommendations without amendment, making the CLRC’s commentary about any given code section the main source of legislative intent.

It is LRI’s standard practice to include the relevant excerpts from the CLRC’s published recommendations on any legislation proposed by them in our legislative history and intent research reports.  However, there is an entire body of CLRC Study Files housed at State Archives which we are happy to research as a separate service.

For information regarding the courts’ use of CLRC materials to determine legislative intent, click here to be redirected to the CLRC website.

Did you hear about the cannibal who was expelled from school?

He was buttering up his teacher…

Little kids shrieking in terror, goblins strolling about, mummies coming unraveled, candied apples, trick-or-treats, and spider webs join together to create a ghoulishly good time for one and all at the LRI outing to the Haunted House.

The staff of LRI spent the night on the town at the California State Fair. We began with the classic turkey races – I kid you not! – where three birds compete to see who can best the rest in a foot race to follow a remote-control dump truck willed with seed. After the side-splitting laughter of watching these crazy turkeys run around in circles, we moved on to the buildings and circulated through the numerous exhibits on display touting California’s heritage and vast accomplishments. From there we ventured into the carnival arena to try our hands at the games. Let me tell you – there is plenty of untapped potential here at LRI! It turns out that we are not just great at researching, but can also throw a mean fastball at the dunking tank!

Starving after an exhausting workout, we made our way to the food court, where we devoured roasted corn on the cob, chicken on a stick, funnel cakes, and the finger-licking delicacy of the deep-fried Oreo! Finally satiated, we felt that we were brave enough to venture into the Haunted House arena. As it turns out, the “frighteningly good time” that we were promised was anything but – Carolina and Heather emerged from the Haunted House Roller Coaster with expressions of laughter instead of horror!