Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Tambone

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided March 10, 2010No. 07-1384Published

1Concurrence

BOUDIN, Circuit Judge, with whom LYNCH, Chief Judge, joins,

concurring.

A “plain language” approach to statutory construction has well-known adherents, and — in construing the SEC’s rule at issue (“make any untrue statement of a material fact”) — bare wording forcefully supports Judge Selya’s thorough and persuasive decision. Yet even a more elastic “all things considered” reading of the rule’s language would not justify the alarmingly ambitious use of it that the agency seeks to deploy in this case.

The word “make,” in reference to a statement, ordinarily refers to one authoring the statement…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug StoresSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. Central Bank of Denver, N. A. v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. Stoneridge Investment Partners, LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2008
  5. Virginia Bankshares, Inc. v. SandbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1991

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API