CIT Bank, N.A. v. Byers

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that the “various linguistic formulae and evidentiary mechanisms” employed by the Court “are not talismanie nor can they substitute for analysis.”
• “[W]e should follow the normal presumption of stare decisis in eases of statutory interpretation”
• “Section 2680(h) does not merely bar claims for [the listed torts]; in sweeping language it excludes any claim arising out of [those torts].”
• “we should follow the normal presumption of stare decisis in cases of statutory interpretation”
• \we should follow the normal presumption of stare decisis in cases of statutory interpretation\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).