Legal Opinion
La Grotta v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided May 6, 1935No. 10065-10067PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FARIS, Circuit Judge.
The three cases above entitled were by consent argued and submitted together. Each of them is a plenary suit by the United States to recover on a forfeited bail bond in a criminal case. These bail bonds, toward which in each case the chief attack is directed, are, save for names, dates, and amounts, wholly similar. Extrinsic and particular facts do not so far differ as to justify separate opinions. Discussion of differentiating facts will, however, be had.
In the La Grotta case, No. 10065, appellant as surety for one Roy Walton was on trial to the court, adjudged to pay…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- United States v. HodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Law v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- The United States, in Error v. Phineas Bradley, Surviving Administrator of David Ott DeceasedSupreme Court of the United States · 1836
- United States v. LinnSupreme Court of the United States · 1841
- United States v. ZarafonitisCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1907
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Continental Casualty Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Adrian Lawrence Dudley v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1957
- E. K. Wood Lumber Co. v. AndersenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- United States v. D'ArgentoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1964
- United States v. WrayDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1975
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.