United States v. McNab
| Decision Date | 29 May 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. 02-11264.,No. 02-10810.,No. 01-15148.,01-15148.,02-10810.,02-11264. |
| Citation | 331 F.3d 1228 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David Henson McNAB, Robert D. Blandford, et al., Defendants-Appellants. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Abner Schoenwetter, Robert D. Blandford, Defendants-Appellants. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David Henson McNAB, Abner Schoenwetter, et al., Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
Jeffrey A. Wadsworth, Miguel A. Estrada, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, Washington, DC, Michael I. Rose, Martin Alan Feigenbaum, Miami, FL, Dennis B. Keene John M. Taturn, Hunter, Maclean, Exley & Dunn, P.C., Savannah, GA, J.P. Courtney, III, Patrick H. Sims, William W. Watts, Mobile, AL, Donald M. Briskman, Briskman & Binion, Victor Talmadge Hudson, II, Hudson & Watts, Mobile, AL, for Defendants-Appellants.
Todd Aagaard, Environmental Div., App. Section, Washington, DC, for U.S.
Tony S. Lee, John Anthony Smith, Martin, J. Gaynes, Robert Lewis Duston, Schmeltzer, Aptaker & Shepard, P.C., Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae Embassy of Honduras.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama (Nos. 00-00079-CR-1-RV, 00-00079-CR-CB); Richard W. Vollmer, Jr., Judge.
Before HULL, WILSON and FAY, Circuit Judges.
ORDERED:
The petitions for rehearing are granted in part by deleting entirely footnote 24 from the Court's opinion which was issued on March 21, 2003. The Court will issue a substituted opinion making that deletion. The Court otherwise denies the petitions for rehearing of defendants' McNab, Schoenwetter, Huang, Blandford and Embassy of Honduras.
No member of this Court having requested a poll, we deny the suggestion for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 35(a); Eleventh Circuit Rule 35-5.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Directv, Inc. v. Cardona
...206 F.3d at 1393; see also United States v. McNab, 324 F.3d 1266, 2003 WL 1419848 (11th Cir.2003), modified and reh'g denied, 331 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. 2003) (recognizing that when the words a statute are unambiguous, the judicial inquiry is complete); Gonzalez, 980 F.2d at 1420 ("The meanin......
-
Natale v. Pfizer, Inc.
...of statutory interpretation that a court is to refer to the legislative intent should any ambiguity exist. Id. (citing U.S. v. McNab, 331 F.3d 1228, 1238 (11th Cir.2003) for the salient convention that a court, interpreting an unclear statute, may refer to statutory purpose, committee discu......
-
U.S. v. Hurtado, 07-11138 Non-Argument Calendar.
...is ambiguous or leads to absurd results, we may consult legislative history to discern congressional intent. See United States v. McNab, 331 F.3d 1228, 1236 (11th Cir.2003). Hurtado has not argued, and we do not find, that the plain language of § 1028A(a)(1) is ambiguous. Furthermore, our r......
-
Animal Sci. Prods., Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharm. Co.
...(1987), a federal court should carefully consider a foreign state's views about the meaning of its own laws. See United States v. McNab, 331 F.3d 1228, 1241 (C.A.11 2003) ; cf. Bodum USA, Inc. v. La Cafetiere, Inc., 621 F.3d 624, 638–639 (C.A.7 2010) (Wood, J., concurring). But the appropri......
-
Buyer (And Others) Beware ... The Lacey Act
...lobsters from Honduras, where criminal convictions were upheld by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v McNab, et al, 331 F.3d 1228 (11th Cir. It is important that companies importing and purchasing goods from overseas be aware and take necessary precautions knowing that they......