· 6/12/1961
Jarecki v. G. D. Searle & Co.
Citations
- 367 U.S. 303
- 81 S. Ct. 1579
- 6 L. Ed. 2d 859
- 1961 U.S. LEXIS 2149
- 2 C.B. 254
- 7 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1585
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that we may not adopt a forced reading of a statute that renders one part a mere redundancy
- noting that we may not adopt a forced reading of a statute that renders one part a mere redundancy
- noting that this maxim “is often wisely applied where a word is capable of many meanings in order to avoid the giving of unintended breadth to the Acts of Congress”
- noting that this maxim “is often wisely applied where a word is capable of many meanings in order to avoid the giving of unintended breadth to the Acts of Congress”
- noting that this maxim “is often wisely applied where a word is capable of many meanings in order to avoid the giving of unintended breadth to the Acts of Congress”
- noting that we may not adopt a forced reading of a statute that renders one part a mere redundancy
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Warren
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.