: a rule of construction: general words (as in a statute) that follow specific words in a list must be construed as referring only to the types of things identified by the specific words “Ejusdem generis rule.”
First, the ejusdem generis canon will often conflict with the ordinary-meaning canon. Take our original example: The ordinary meaning of pet is “a domesticated animal kept for pleasure rather than utility.”77Even a snake can fit that definition.
Still, drafters so routinely mix specifics with a more general term that courts often have to divine whether some other specific is included. A Westlaw search for “ejusdem generis” in April 2016 produced 2,848 federal citations and 6,154 state citations, or about 9,000 total.
The Courts by improperly using the rule of Ejusdem Generis, changes the whole meaning of the provision and thus defeat the purpose of the Act, as to the intent of the legislation. This results in miscarriage of Justice. State Of Bombay v. Ali Gulshan, 1955 Supreme Court ( See Here)
Ejusdem generis is latin for "of the same kind." When a law lists lists classes of persons or things, this concept is used to clarify such a list. For example, if a law refers to automobiles, trucks, tractors, motorcycles, and other motor-powered vehicles, a court might use ejusdem generisto hold that such vehicles would not include airplanes, beca
In Circuit City Stores Inc., v. Adams, 532 U.S. 105 (2001), the Supreme Court defined ejusdem generis as a situation in which "general words follow specific words in a statutory enumeration, the general words are construed to embrace only objects similar in nature to those objects enumerated by the preceding specific words." See full list on law.cornell.edu
For more on ejusdem generis, see this Washington University Law Review article, this Scribes Journal of Legal Writing article, and this Michigan Law Review article. See full list on law.cornell.edu