Literal application of legal rules sometimes produces absurd against-purpose outcomes
Evidence
Fuller’s misguided foray into the philosophy of language, ironically, detracted from rather than supported his highly valuable central point. The war memorial made out of a functioning military truck really was a vehicle, just as the tired businessman really was sleeping in the station, and just as the sheriff in Kirby really did obstruct the delivery of mail. What these and countless other examples, both real and hypothetical, show is that the application of the literal language of a rule will now and then produce an outcome that is absurd, ridiculous, or at least at odds with the principal purpose lying behind the rule. — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 284
Categorization
- XREF: Recalls the theme of small acts of decorum toward corpses mattering more than practical logic — literal rule-following overridden by purpose/meaning. — connects to: Treating a metaphor literally exposes the absurdity of a claim — , A Year of World Stories, 2439; Law deliberately accepts suboptimal answers to maximize long-term institutional correctness. — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 431; Rules necessarily overreach their justifications because of their intrinsic generality — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 46 (+24 more)
Related
- A lenient legal interpretation inadvertently broke the debt-peonage labor system (similarity 0.83)
- Rules function as rules only if they tolerate some suboptimal outcomes (similarity 0.81)
- Rules necessarily overreach their justifications because of their intrinsic generality (similarity 0.79)
- Law deliberately accepts suboptimal answers to maximize long-term institutional correctness. (similarity 0.79)
Broader Connections
- Judicial rules should not be applied to dryly logical extremes
#corroborates(0.85) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 144 - Literal statutory interpretations are defeasible starting points
#corroborates(0.70) — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 303 - Legal rules intentionally incorporate arbitrary detail to maximize certainty and predictability.
#complicates(0.55) — HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (Clarendon Law…, 534