- 53 -
provisions, to permit consistent application of a
standard for allocation of interest. See S. Rept. 100-
445, at 36 (1988); H. Rept. 100-795, at 35 (1988).
There is no indication that the change in language was
intended to make any substantive change in the meaning
of the statutory language.
We hold for respondent on this issue.
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
Reviewed by the Court.
COHEN, WHALEN, HALPERN, BEGHE, and MARVEL, JJ., agree with
the majority opinion.
GERBER, CHIECHI, and GALE, JJ., concur.
FOLEY, J., did not participate in consideration of this
case.
Page: Previous 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011