Legal Opinion

United States v. Ury

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided July 26, 1939No. 381PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PATTERSON, Circuit Judge.

The appellant was charged by information filed by the United. States attorney with having violated section 304(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. § 1304(d), 19 U.S.C.A. § 1304(d), by removing from a number of generators imported from Germany the mark “Germany”, indicating the country of origin, with intent to conceal the information given by the mark. The information followed the language of the statute and did not allege what interest the appellant had in the generators, merely describing him as “doing business as the Aüto Lectric Distributors,” nor did the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Buttfield v. StranahanSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  2. Yee Hem v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  3. Brolan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  4. Hocking Valley Ry. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
  5. Oesting v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1916

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Haynes v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Young v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
  3. Class v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2018
  4. United States v. Michael St. HubertCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2018
  5. American Meat Institute v. United States Department of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2014

23 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