What is the standard of review for an appellate court’s interpretation of a statute?

When an appellate court is looking at a case involving the interpretation of a statute, they review it according to the standard of review. This means that the court must consider the meaning of the statute to determine whether the trial court’s ruling was correct. In South Carolina, the standard of review when dealing with an interpretation of a statute is de novo. This means that the appellate court is starting with a clean slate and is not bound by the trial court’s interpretation. The appellate court is looking at the case with fresh eyes and can come to its own conclusion about how the statute should be interpreted. The appellate court will consider the plain language of the statute, as well as look at how it’s been interpreted in similar cases. The appellate court may also consider legislative history or public policy to make its determination. After the appellate court has reviewed all of the facts and circumstances, it will make a decision on whether the trial court’s ruling was correct. If it finds that the trial court made an error, the appellate court has the power to reverse it. This decision is then final, and the appellate court’s interpretation of the statute is binding.

Related FAQs

What is an interlocutory appeal?
What is an appellate court’s ruling on a motion to dismiss?
How do I obtain a copy of the appellate court’s opinion?
How are cases selected for review by an appellate court?
What happens if I lose my appeal?
Are there any deadlines or limitations periods for filing an appeal?
Can a party appeal a judge’s decision directly to the state's Supreme Court?
What is the process for obtaining a stay of execution pending appeal?
What is the standard of review on a trial court’s decision to admit or exclude evidence?
How does an appellate court decide a case?

What is the standard of review for an appellate court’s interpretation of a statute?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts