Epstein Secrets

s strong evidence that Congress did not intend to authorize other remedies that it simply forgot to incorporate expressly." United States States v. Monzel, 641 F.3d 528, 542 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, No. 11-85, S. Ct. 2011 WL 3055311 (Nov. 28, 2011) (quoting Mertens v. Hewitt Associates, 508 U.S. 24

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

s strong evidence that Congress did not intend to authorize other remedies that it simply forgot to incorporate expressly." United States States v. Monzel, 641 F.3d 528, 542 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, No. 11-85, S. Ct. 2011 WL 3055311 (Nov. 28, 2011) (quoting Mertens v. Hewitt Associates, 508 U.S. 24

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

s strong evidence that Congress did not intend to authorize other remedies that it simply forgot to incorporate expressly." United States States v. Monzel, 641 F.3d 528, 542 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, No. 11-85, S. Ct. 2011 WL 3055311 (Nov. 28, 2011) (quoting Mertens v. Hewitt Associates, 508 U.S. 24

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