Guest Dan Posted March 28, 2016 at 10:10 AM Report Share Posted March 28, 2016 at 10:10 AM In §35 on rescinding, we have "the assembly can change an action previously taken or ordered", and "Rescind ... is the motion by which a previous action or order can be canceled or countermanded." Are these singular articles "an" and "a" intended to be taken literally, or should they be interpreted as "one or more"? I don't see any rule of statutory construction such as "the singular includes the plural" as seen in some other legal documents. In other words, if the assembly tried to rescind two previous actions in a single vote, would that be out of order? Or would it be fine unless someone made a motion for division of the question? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted March 28, 2016 at 12:05 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2016 at 12:05 PM It could be treated like any other motion that could be divided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted March 28, 2016 at 12:06 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2016 at 12:06 PM It is in order, of course, to move to rescind or amend any bylaw, rule, or policy which was made or created as the result of the adoption of two or more main motions, which is why RONR says that these motions may be applied to anything "which has continuing force and effect and which was made or created at any time or times as the result of the adoption of one or more main motions." (RONR, 11th ed., p. 305, ll. 28-31, emphasis supplied.) I would think that there certainly can be instances in which it would be in order to move to rescind more than one previously adopted rule or policy in a single motion, and in such an event the rules in Section 27 relating to division of the question will apply. Attention will also need to be paid to the extent of previous notice, if any, which has been given. If previous notice has not been given of an intention to rescind all of the rules or policies included in the motion to rescind, the lower voting threshold will not apply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dan Posted March 28, 2016 at 06:13 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2016 at 06:13 PM Quote It is in order, of course, to move to rescind or amend any bylaw, rule, or policy which was made or created as the result of the adoption of two or more main motions, which is why RONR says that these motions may be applied to anything "which has continuing force and effect and which was made or created at any time or times as the result of the adoption of one or more main motions." (RONR, 11th ed., p. 305, ll. 28-31, emphasis supplied.) Interesting that "one or more" is used here, but not in the first paragraph of §35, where the articles are all singular. It would certainly make sense that a single bylaw, rule, or policy that was the result of multiple amendments over time could be rescinded in one vote, especially if the bylaw, rule or policy was not dividable. But given the singular articles, it doesn't seem clear that two independent bylaws, rules or policies could be rescinded in one vote, unless "policy" is interpreted very broadly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 28, 2016 at 06:53 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2016 at 06:53 PM actually, I am convinced now, given that the word "anything" is very broad. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted March 28, 2016 at 07:00 PM Report Share Posted March 28, 2016 at 07:00 PM I might add that RONR, on page 100, speaks only in terms of "a main motion", but there can be no doubt but that a number of main motions or resolutions can be offered under a single enacting motion. A motion to rescind is a main motion, and there is no reason to believe that a number of such motions cannot be offered under one enacting motion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrandRascal Posted February 5, 2021 at 01:54 PM Report Share Posted February 5, 2021 at 01:54 PM Standard Disclaimer -- IANAL -- but my understanding, is that the singular does NOT include the plural, but that the plural DOES include the singular. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts