Epstein Secrets

denied, No. 11-85, S. Ct. 2011 WL 3055311 (Nov. 28, 2011) (quoting Mertens v. Hewitt Associates, 508 U.S. 248, 254 (1993)); see United States v. Hunter, 548 F.3d 1308, 1315 (10th Cir. 2008) (declining to "to read additional remedies" into the CVRA beyond those expressly contained in the Act); see al

f statutory construction that where a statute expressly provides a particular remedy or remedies, a court must be chary of reading others into it." Middlesex County Sewerage Auth. v. Nat'l Sea Clanuners Ass'n, 453 U.S. 1, 14- 15 (1981) (quoting Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis, 444 U.S. 1, 19 (1979)). Because the

denied, No. 11-85, S. Ct. 2011 WL 3055311 (Nov. 28, 2011) (quoting Mertens v. Hewitt Associates, 508 U.S. 248, 254 (1993)); see United States v. Hunter, 548 F.3d 1308, 1315 (10th Cir. 2008) (declining to "to read additional remedies" into the CVRA beyond those expressly contained in the Act); see al

f statutory construction that where a statute expressly provides a particular remedy or remedies, a court must be chary of reading others into it." Middlesex County Sewerage Auth. v. Nat'l Sea Clanuners Ass'n, 453 U.S. 1, 14- 15 (1981) (quoting Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis, 444 U.S. 1, 19 (1979)). Because the

denied, No. 11-85, S. Ct. 2011 WL 3055311 (Nov. 28, 2011) (quoting Mertens v. Hewitt Associates, 508 U.S. 248, 254 (1993)); see United States v. Hunter, 548 F.3d 1308, 1315 (10th Cir. 2008) (declining to "to read additional remedies" into the CVRA beyond those expressly contained in the Act); see al

f statutory construction that where a statute expressly provides a particular remedy or remedies, a court must be chary of reading others into it." Middlesex County Sewerage Auth. v. Nat'l Sea Clammers Ass 'n, 453 U.S. I, 14- 15 (1981) (quoting Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis, 444 U.S. 1, 19 (1979)). Because the

denied, No. 11-85, S. Ct. 2011 WL 3055311 (Nov. 28, 2011) (quoting Mertens v. Hewitt Associates, 508 U.S. 248, 254 (1993)); see United States v. Hunter, 548 F.3d 1308, 1315 (10th Cir. 2008) (declining to "to read additional remedies" into the CVRA beyond those expressly contained in the Act); see al

f statutory construction that where a statute expressly provides a particular remedy or remedies, a court must be chary of reading others into it." Middlesex County Sewerage Auth. v. Nat'l Sea Clanuners Ass'n, 453 U.S. I, 14- 15 (1981) (quoting Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis, 444 U.S. 1, 19 (1979)). Because the