Rjr Nabisco, Inc. v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• “If th{e] language is unambiguous, the courts must enforce the statute as written absent a clearly expressed legislative intent to the contrary.”
• “Hence, appellant’s argument that the effective-date language exempts it from compound interest cannot logically follow .... unless Congress also intended to exempt all taxpayers from the operation of the statute.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).