cited Cited "see" State v. Freeney See United States v. Mesa, 660 F.2d 1070 , 1077 n.2, reh. denied, 667 F.2d 93 (5th Cir. 1981).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." In Re Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company, Debtor. Consolidated Joint Appeals Of: Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company, as Debtor, and Chicago Milwaukee Corporation, as Shareholder See also Scheinberg v. Smith, 659 F.2d 476 , rehearing denied, 667 F.2d 93 (5th Cir.1981) ("The controlling inquiry in matters of severance is whether the legislature intended the offensive statutory provision to be an integral part of the statutory enactment.... [t]he question is whether the legislature would have enacted the valid portions of the statute with the unconstitutional portions stricken therefrom." 659 F.2d at 481 (citations omitted).). 26 Our review of the legislative history and statutory language of the MRRA indicates that it is not possible to sever section 7 of the MRRA and c…

discussed Cited "see, e.g." In re Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad See also Scheinberg v. Smith, 659 F.2d 476 , rehearing denied, 667 F.2d 93 (5th Cir.1981) (“The controlling inquiry in matters of severance is whether the legislature intended the offensive statutory provision to be an integral part of the statutory enactment.... [t]he question is whether the legislature would have enacted the valid portions of the statute with the unconstitutional portions stricken therefrom.” 659 F.2d at 481 (citations omitted).).