Epstein Secrets

tch Ltd.. L.P., No. 03 Civ. 1382 RWS, 2003 WL 23018833 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2003) 10, 11 Oppenheimer Fund. Inc. v. Sanders 437 U.S. 340 (1978) 10 Patterson v. Burge. No. 03 C 4433, 2005 WL 43240 (N.D. III. Jan 6, 2005) 4.5 Persky v. Yeshiva Univ. No. 01 Civ. 4278 (LMM). 2002 WL 31769704 (S.D.N.Y. Dec

HERE ARE NO MATERIAL FACTS IN DISPUTE 17 CONCLUSION 18 ii EFTA00728010 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Altemosc Constr. Co. v. Building & Constr. Trades Council 443 F. Supp. 489 (E.D. Pa. 1977) 19 Apicella v. McNeil Labs. Inc. 66 F.R.D. 78 (E.D.N.Y. 1975) 4 Mel v. Murphy, 70 F.R.D. 651 (D.R.I. 1976) 5

tch Ltd.. L.P., No. 03 Civ. 1382 RWS, 2003 WL 23018833 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2003) 10, 11 Oppenheimer Fund. Inc. v. Sanders 437 U.S. 340 (1978) 10 Patterson v. Burge. No. 03 C 4433, 2005 WL 43240 (N.D. III. Jan 6, 2005) 4.5 Persky v. Yeshiva Univ. No. 01 Civ. 4278 (LMM). 2002 WL 31769704 (S.D.N.Y. Dec

HERE ARE NO MATERIAL FACTS IN DISPUTE 17 CONCLUSION 18 ii EFTA00207333 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES Altemosc Constr. Co. v. Building & Constr. Trades Council 443 F. Supp. 489 (E.D. Pa. 1977) 19 Apicella v. McNeil Labs. Inc. 66 F.R.D. 78 (E.D.N.Y. 1975) 4 Mel v. Murphy, 70 F.R.D. 651 (D.R.I. 1976) 5

we assume that the legislative purpose is expressed by the ordinary meaning"—not the idiosyncratic meaning—"of the words used." Am. Tobacco Co. v. Patterson, 456 U.S. 63, 68, 102 S.Ct. 1534, 71 L.Ed.2d 748 (1982) (quotation marks and citation omitted). The term "motion" is—and long has been—commonly un

e-charge model does not raise 'serious constitutional problems," there is no issue. Edward J. DeBartolo Corp. v. Florida Gulf Coast Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council. 485 U.S. 568. 575. 108 S. Ct. 1392. 1397. 99 L.Ed.2d 645 (1988)). But I do not believe the text is so clear, and—as I discuss below—I believe the