context: Indication that the treaty drafters likely intended to invoke the broader of these meanings may be found in the accompanying language of the "bad men" clause, which talks not in terms of "reim-bursLingj" the injured person for amounts paid or costs incurred, but rather for the "loss sustained." The latter phrase, which in no way refers to out-of-pocket expenditures, seemingly clashes with the notion that the operative verb -- "reimburse"--ought to be construed in the crabbed fashion defendant argues.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 499 U.S. 530, 534
citation_a.parenthetical: courts should consider the treaty's language in the "context in which the written words are used"
citation_a.sentence: See Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd, 499 U.S. 530, 534, 111 S.Ct. 1489, 113 L.Ed.2d 569 (1991) (courts should consider the treaty’s language in the “context in which the written words are used”); see also United States v. Cienfuegos, 462 F.3d 1160, 1163-64 (9th Cir.2006) (construing the word “reimburse,” as used in 18 U.S.C. § 3663A, broadly to include future income lost by a decedent based on the surrounding statutory language).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 462 F.3d 1160, 1163-64
citation_b.parenthetical: construing the word "reimburse," as used in 18 U.S.C. SS 3663A, broadly to include future income lost by a decedent based on the surrounding statutory language
citation_b.sentence: See Eastern Airlines, Inc. v. Floyd, 499 U.S. 530, 534, 111 S.Ct. 1489, 113 L.Ed.2d 569 (1991) (courts should consider the treaty’s language in the “context in which the written words are used”); see also United States v. Cienfuegos, 462 F.3d 1160, 1163-64 (9th Cir.2006) (construing the word “reimburse,” as used in 18 U.S.C. § 3663A, broadly to include future income lost by a decedent based on the surrounding statutory language).