Key Takeaways

  • The California Civil Code Part 4 (Sections 3509–3548) lays out maxims of jurisprudence, which serve as guiding legal principles.
  • These maxims reflect fairness, reason, and common sense, offering courts interpretive tools when statutes or precedent are unclear.
  • Many maxims echo Roman law and English common law traditions, yet are uniquely codified in California.
  • They cover themes like equity, fairness, interpretation of laws, responsibility, and remedies for wrongs.
  • Lawyers often cite maxims to reinforce arguments when statutes are silent or ambiguous, though they do not override clear statutory law.
  • Understanding these maxims is key for litigants, as judges may rely on them to interpret unclear provisions.

3510 When the reason for a rule ceases, so should the rule itself.

3511 Where the reason is the same, the rule should be the same.

3512 One must not change his purpose to the injury of another

3513 Anyone may waive the advantage of a law intended solely for his benefit. But a law established for a public reason cannot be contravened by a private agreement.

3514 One must so use his own rights as not to infringe upon the rights of another.

3515 He who consents to an act is not wronged by it.

3516 Acquiescence in error takes away the right of objecting.

3517 No one can take advantage of his own wrong.

3518 He who has fraudulently dispossessed himself of a thing may be treated as if he still had possession.

3519 He who can and does not forbid that which is done on his behalf, is deemed to have bidden it.

3520 No one should suffer by the act of another.

3521 He who takes the benefit must bear the burden.

3522 One who grants a thing is presumed to grant also whatever is essential to its use.

3523 For every wrong there is a remedy.

3524 Between those who are equally in the right, or equally in the wrong, the law does not interpose.

3525 Between rights otherwise equal, the earliest is preferred.

3526 No man is responsible for that which no man can control.

3527 The law helps the vigilant, before those who sleep on their rights.

3528 The law respects form less than substance.

3529 That which ought to have been done is to be regarded as done, in favor of him to whom, and against him from whom, performance is due.

3530 That which does not appear to exist is to be regarded as if it did not exist.

3531 The law never requires impossibilities.

3532 The law neither does nor requires idle acts.

3533 The law disregards trifles.

3534 Particular expressions qualify those which are general.

3535 Contemporaneous exposition is in general the best.

3536 The greater contains the less.

3537 Superfluity does not vitiate.

3538 That is certain which can be made certain.

3539 Time does not confirm a void act.

3540 The incident follows the principal, and not the principal the incident.

3541 An interpretation which gives effect is preferred to one which makes void.

3542 Interpretation must be reasonable.

3543 Where one of two innocent persons must suffer by the act of a third, he, by whose negligence it happened, must be the sufferer.

3545 Private transactions are fair and regular.

3546 Things happen according to the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary habits of life.

3547 A thing continues to exist as long as is usual with things of that nature.

3548 The law has been obeyed.

Historical Background of the Maxims

The lectl maxims of jurisprudence most Part 4 of the California Civil Code trace their roots to centuries-old legal traditions. Many derive from Roman law and were transmitted through English common law before being adopted into California’s statutory framework in 1872. By placing these principles directly into the Civil Code, California became one of the few jurisdictions to codify legal maxims as enforceable interpretive tools. This codification ensures that courts may turn to them not only as persuasive authority but also as part of the statutory law itself.

Purpose and Function in Law

These maxims are not binding rules in the same way as statutes, but they act as guides to interpretation. When legislation is ambiguous or silent, courts may rely on a relevant maxim to determine the fairest outcome. For example, the maxim “For every wrong there is a remedy” underscores the judiciary’s duty to provide relief where harm has occurred. Similarly, “The law helps the vigilant, before those who sleep on their rights” supports doctrines such as statutes of limitation.

The maxims collectively embody themes of:

  • Fairness and justice (e.g., no one should benefit from their own wrong).
  • Equity and reasonableness (e.g., interpretation must be reasonable).
  • Balance of rights and duties (e.g., he who takes the benefit must bear the burden).

Practical Applications in Court

Attorneys frequently invoke maxims to strengthen arguments, especially in cases where the statutory text is open to multiple interpretations. For example:

  • Contract disputes: “Particular expressions qualify those which are general” often supports narrow readings of broad clauses.
  • Tort law: “No one can take advantage of his own wrong” reinforces liability where misconduct caused harm.
  • Property law: “One who grants a thing is presumed to grant also whatever is essential to its use” clarifies disputes over easements or implied rights.

Judges, while not bound to apply maxims when statutes are clear, often cite them to illustrate that a decision is consistent with long-standing principles of fairness.

Criticism and Modern Relevance

Some legal scholars have criticized the codification of these maxims as too vague or redundant, since many simply restate common sense. However, their inclusion has enduring value. They remind courts that the law is not merely a rigid set of technical rules but must be interpreted in light of equity and justice.

In contemporary practice, courts still cite maxims when faced with novel issues, gaps in legislation, or conflicts between statutes. They also provide a rhetorical bridge between abstract legal doctrines and everyday notions of fairness, helping litigants understand why courts reach particular outcomes.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What are the lectl maxims of jurisprudence in California law?
    They are a set of 40+ legal principles codified in the California Civil Code, Part 4 (Sections 3509–3548), serving as interpretive guides for courts.
  2. Do judges have to follow these maxims?
    Not strictly. They are persuasive tools rather than binding law, but because they are codified, courts often give them significant weight.
  3. Where did these maxims come from?
    Most originated in Roman law, filtered through English common law, and were codified into California’s Civil Code in 1872.
  4. How do attorneys use these maxims in arguments?
    Lawyers cite them to support interpretations that align with fairness, reasonableness, and equity when statutes are ambiguous.
  5. Are the maxims still relevant today?
    Yes. Courts continue to reference them when statutory law is unclear, and they remain central to California’s legal reasoning tradition.

If you need help with understanding Lectl Maxims of Jurisprudence, you can post your legal need on UpCounsel’s marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5 percent of lawyers to its site. Lawyers on UpCounsel come from law schools such as Harvard Law and Yale Law and average 14 years of legal experience, including work with or on behalf of companies like Google, Menlo Ventures, and Airbnb.