Definition
A specific instance, case, or illustration used to clarify, support, or demonstrate a general rule, principle, or proposition. In legal usage, "example" operates primarily as an interpretive and rhetorical device rather than as a term of art with fixed legal consequences. It appears in three overlapping contexts:
1. Statutory and contractual construction: A list introduced by "for example," "including but not limited to," or similar phrases signals that the items following are illustrative, not exhaustive. Courts treat such examples as evidence of legislative or drafting intent without treating the list as a limitation on the broader category.
2. Judicial reasoning and analogy: Courts invoke prior cases or hypothetical situations as examples to test the boundaries of a rule, distinguish holdings, or establish that a principle applies consistently across fact patterns.
3. Evidentiary and pedagogical use: In briefs, opinions, and legal scholarship, examples anchor abstract legal propositions in concrete fact situations, helping decision-makers assess whether a rule produces acceptable results at its edges.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): Something representative of a group; something that illustrates a rule; a pattern of behavior to be imitated or avoided; a person punished as a warning to others; a parallel or closely similar case serving as a precedent or model.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): "One or a portion taken to show the character or quality of the whole; a sample; a specimen. That which is to be followed or imitated as a model; a pattern or copy. That which resembles or corresponds with something else; a precedent; a model."
The ordinary meaning is largely consistent with the legal use, but one gap is significant: in common English, calling something an "example" implies it is representative without being exhaustive. In legal drafting and statutory construction, this implication carries formal weight — courts actively use the presence of examples to defeat arguments that a provision is meant to be a closed, exclusive list. The everyday word carries a technical consequence in interpretive law that most non-lawyers do not anticipate.
Why It Matters in Research
The word "example" is a sleeper term in statutory construction research. When a statute or contract uses illustrative language ("such as," "for example," "including"), the interpretive question shifts from what the list contains to what the list signals about the scope of the broader category. Researchers tracing legislative history should look for contemporaneous committee reports or floor debates that treat the examples as either representative samples or as the full intended scope — the drafting record often resolves ambiguity the text does not.
In historical sources, "example" was also used in the punitive sense (Webster's preserves this: making an offender "an example"). That usage appears in older criminal law materials and sentencing discussions. A researcher reading 18th- or 19th-century sources on punishment may encounter "example" meaning a publicly punished individual meant to deter others — a meaning that has largely dropped from modern legal vocabulary but survives in the phrase "making an example of."
The Anderson's entry indexed under this term concerns cross-examination rather than the headword itself, which is a misfiling or indexing artifact. Researchers using Anderson's should be aware that cross-references and sub-entries are occasionally organized by illustration rather than by subject heading, which can produce unexpected placements.
For corpus researchers searching Law Mind for "example," expect high noise: the term appears constantly as a discourse marker in opinions and briefs, making it difficult to isolate instances where "example" is itself the subject of legal analysis. Narrowing searches to statutory construction, ejusdem generis, or expressio unius contexts will improve signal.
Historical Dictionary Support
Anderson's Dictionary of Law does not provide a standalone entry for "example" as a legal term. The material catalogued under this heading in the source relates to cross-examination — specifically the principle that cross-examination is "the crucial test" of truth and that a witness may not be cross-examined on matters outside the scope of direct examination. This content belongs to the entry for CROSS-EXAMINATION and appears here likely due to an indexing anomaly in the source. Researchers should consult the cross-examination entry directly.
Historical legal dictionaries generally did not treat "example" as a term requiring independent definition, reflecting the view that it functioned as ordinary language within legal texts rather than as a term of art. This omission is itself informative: the legal significance of "example" emerges from interpretive doctrine built around it, not from any specialized legal meaning assigned to the word itself.
Jurisdictional Note
The interpretive weight given to illustrative examples in statutes is broadly consistent across common law jurisdictions, but the specific canons invoked differ. U.S. courts frequently apply ejusdem generis and expressio unius alongside analysis of "for example" language; UK courts apply similar principles under different labels. Researchers working across jurisdictions should not assume that the same list structure will produce the same interpretive outcome.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Law Mind Encyclopedia — Evidence (for use of examples in evidentiary reasoning and analogical argument)
Law Mind Encyclopedia — Statutory Interpretation (for the role of illustrative lists in construing legislative scope)