|
includling the kittlings
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Shoonra
But the same case discussed the very considerable legal authority for treating include as a term of expansion (by the way, the words in the message repeated above are not an exact quote from the decision). The Supreme Court generally rejected the notion that include was a term of limitation in several cases, such as Federal Land Bank v. Bismarck Lumber Co.(1941) 314 US 95 at 100; American Surety Co. v. Marotta (1933) 287 US 513 at 517; and Helvering v. Morgan's Inc. (1934) 293 US 121 at 125. The meaning upheld by the Helvering decision is still embodied in 26 USC sec 7701(c):
"The terms includes and including, when used in a definition contained in this title, shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise within the meaning of the term defined."
|
So, thus meaning that the court has efectively and stealthily changed a fundamental legal meaning (this
reminds me of scripture) which screws up the whole game!
right?
__________________
I claim ownership of and accept responsibility for every word I have written; I cannot claim ownership for any quotes I have made, being the words of whomever I quoted, to whom I say `thank you'.
|