Rubin v. United States, No. 79-1013
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | BURGER |
| Citation | 101 S.Ct. 698,66 L.Ed.2d 633,449 U.S. 424 |
| Parties | William RUBIN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES |
| Docket Number | No. 79-1013 |
| Decision Date | 21 January 1981 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
698 practice notes
-
Securities and Exchange Commission,
...for these purposes. The pledge of stock is a ``sale'' within the meaning of Section 2(3) of the Securities Act. Rubin v. United States, 449 U.S. 424 (1981). The Court stated that although full title to the pledged securities were not transferred, the transaction nonetheless could be a sale.......
-
U.S. v. Harris, Nos. 89-3205
...terms of a statute unambiguous, judicial inquiry is complete, except 'in "rare and exceptional circumstances." ' " Rubin v. United States, 449 U.S. 424, 430, 101 S.Ct. 698, 701, 66 L.Ed.2d 633 (1981) (citations omitted). We agree with the Second Circuit that the terms of section 848(c) are ......
-
United States v. Walker, Crim. A. No. 80-486.
...selected by the Congress is to be put aside in the process of interpreting a statute.'" Rubin v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, ___ n.8, 101 S.Ct. 698, 702 n.8, 66 L.Ed.2d 633 (1981) (quoting TVA v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153, 194, 98 S.Ct. 2279, 2301, 57 L.Ed.2d 117 (1978)). Absent a contention, not......
-
United States v. Voisine, Nos. 12–1213
...justification for the majority's heavy reliance on the legislative history of the Lautenberg Amendment. See, e.g., Rubin v. United States, 449 U.S. 424, 430, 101 S.Ct. 698, 66 L.Ed.2d 633 (1981) (“When we find the terms of a statute unambiguous, judicial inquiry is complete, except ‘in rare......
Request a trial to view additional results
711 cases
-
U.S. v. Harris, Nos. 89-3205
...terms of a statute unambiguous, judicial inquiry is complete, except 'in "rare and exceptional circumstances." ' " Rubin v. United States, 449 U.S. 424, 430, 101 S.Ct. 698, 701, 66 L.Ed.2d 633 (1981) (citations omitted). We agree with the Second Circuit that the terms of section 848(c) are ......
-
United States v. Walker, Crim. A. No. 80-486.
...selected by the Congress is to be put aside in the process of interpreting a statute.'" Rubin v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, ___ n.8, 101 S.Ct. 698, 702 n.8, 66 L.Ed.2d 633 (1981) (quoting TVA v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153, 194, 98 S.Ct. 2279, 2301, 57 L.Ed.2d 117 (1978)). Absent a contention, not......
-
United States v. Voisine, Nos. 12–1213
...justification for the majority's heavy reliance on the legislative history of the Lautenberg Amendment. See, e.g., Rubin v. United States, 449 U.S. 424, 430, 101 S.Ct. 698, 66 L.Ed.2d 633 (1981) (“When we find the terms of a statute unambiguous, judicial inquiry is complete, except ‘in rare......
-
US v. Benson, No. 92-20184-TU.
...the words of a statute are unambiguous, then, this first canon is also the last: "judicial inquiry is complete." Rubin v. United States, 449 U.S. 424, 430 101 S.Ct. 698, 701, 66 L.Ed.2d 633 (1981); see also Ron Pair Enterprises, supra, 489 U.S. at 241 109 S.Ct. at Connecticut Nat'l Bank v. ......
Request a trial to view additional results