In re Harry Tun

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that Yakama Nation was not entitled to a permanent injunctive after failing to show actual success on the merits
• construing the term “and” disjunctively because not doing so would render other statutory language superfluous
• affirming district court’s denial of permanent injunction because plaintiff had not shown actual success on the merits
• construing the term “and” disjunctively because not doing so would render other statutory language superfluous
• “[J]ust because the ordinary meaning of ‘and’ is typically conjunctive does not mean ‘and’ cannot take on other meanings in context.”
• “[C]ourts are often compelled to construe ‘or’ as meaning ‘and,’ and again ‘and’ as meaning ‘or.’” (quoting United States v. Fisk, 70 U.S. 445, 447 (1865))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).