The following excerpt is from Nemee v. Cnty. of Calaveras (In re Nemee), Adv. Proc. No. 09-9088, Case No. 09-93249-E-11 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2011):
determine the intent of the statute or ordinance, the court looks first to the plain language and ordinary meaning of the words used. The words are read in context of the ordinance, considering the nature and purpose of the enactment. If the language is clear, then no further interpretation of the statute is necessary. If the language is ambiguous, then the court considers extrinsic evidence, Kempton, 40 Cal. 4th at 1037, which includes the legislative history, public policy, and the statutory scheme of which the statute is a part. Finally, if after reviewing the plain language and extrinsic aids the meaning of the statute remains unclear, the court, proceeding cautiously, applies reason, practicality, and common sense to the statute. Woodland Park v. City of East Palo Alto Rent Stabilization Board, 181 Cal. App. 4th 915, 920 (2010).
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.