January 01, 2006
The court decided a case reported at 433 F.3d 273 (2d Cir. 2006), which cited McDonough.
DOJ-OGR-00009207.jpg
This legal document is a portion of a brief arguing against the government's reliance on the case United States v. Shaoul. The author contends that the government's interpretation of Shaoul is flawed because it did not address the specific argument being made, its relevant language is non-binding dictum, and it is inconsistent with earlier, controlling precedents like Langford and the Supreme Court's decision in McDonough. The document uses principles of legal precedent to assert that the court should not follow the government's reasoning.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event