Statutory overruling language sometimes gets tested for civil-law habits

Evidence

That means that just about everybody was fooled. This reasoning would seem to be more in accordance kith the traditional thought habit of the civil law than of the common law although both always tend to modify themselves toward each -other. But courts have often concluded thlt to apply the new construction to a previous transaction would be unjust. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 2908

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Common-law judging habits now shape statutory interpretation too. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 117; Legislatures can use declaratory language to correct unwelcome judicial decisions — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 4830; Literal statutory interpretations are defeasible starting points — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 303

Broader Connections

• Legislatures can use declaratory language to correct unwelcome judicial decisions #corroborates (0.90) — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 4830
• Common-law judging habits now shape statutory interpretation too. #complicates (0.85) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 117
• Literal statutory interpretations are defeasible starting points #expands (0.72) — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 303