Foster v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio. T^ouis W. Foster and others were convicted of using the United States mails in furtherance of a scheme to defrattd and they bring error. The defendants were .-jointly indicted under section B480 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (U. S. Comp.
Read the full summary
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio. T^ouis W. Foster and others were convicted of using the United States mails in furtherance of a scheme to defrattd and they bring error. The defendants were .-jointly indicted under section B480 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (U. S. Comp. St. 1901., p. 3696), which provides that T‘if any person having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud * * * to bo effected by either opening or intending to open correspondence or communication with any person * * * by means of the…
1Opinion of the CourtKnappen, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The proposition which first claims attention is that the second and third counts should have been squashed as fatally defective. The specific criticism is that the language, “in and for executing the scheme and artifice to defraud set out in the first count [of the indictment], which statement is hereby made a part of this second count of this indictment,” is insufficient to incorporate into the subsequent counts the allegation that the defendants actually devised the scheme to defraud set out in the first count; the argument being that the wbrd “statement”…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Durland v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Adams v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- United States v. HessSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Crain v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Evans v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- United States v. PearlsteinCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
- United States v. FeinbergCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- Cochran v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1930
- Harrison v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1912
- Brady v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.