United States v. Kraus
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
EVANS, Circuit Judge.
Although it is vigorously attacked, we accept the decision of this court announced in 33 F.(2d) 406, unqualifiedly.
It is unnecessary, because of our disposition of appellees’ other point, to consider the various authorities cited by appellees [U. S. v. San Jacinto Tin Co., 125 U. S. 273, 275, 8 S. Ct. 850, 31 L. Ed. 747; Heckman v. U. S., 224 U. S. 413, 439, 32 S. Ct. 424, 56 L. Ed. 820; U. S. v. New Orleans, etc., Co., 248 U. S. 507, 518, 39 S. Ct. 175, 63 L. Ed. 388; U. S. v. Gordin (D. C. S. D. Ohio) decided December 4, 1924, not reported1; U. S. v. McFarland (C. C.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Heckman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- United States v. San Jacinto Tin Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
- United States v. Corliss Steam-Engine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1876
- United States v. New Orleans Pacific R. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
- United States v. KrausCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.