United States v. Mett
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
FLETCHER, Circuit Judge:
William Mett (“Mett”) and Marvin Wiseman (“Wiseman”) appeal from jury convictions arising out of certain improper transactions involving pension benefit plans administered by them. Because highly prejudicial evidence was erroneously admitted against the defendants at trial in violation of the attorney-client privilege, and because this error was not harmless, we reverse the convictions. In order to assist the district court on remand, we also take this opportunity to clarify certain aspects of the scienter required for a pension fund embezzlement conviction pursuant to…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Huie v. DeShazoTexas Supreme Court · 1996
- Kenneth E. Wildbur, Sr. v. Arco Chemical Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
- Riggs National Bank of Washington, D. C. v. ZimmerCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1976
- Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild, Local 35 v. Washington Star Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1982
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by99 opinions
- United States v. Jicarilla Apache NationSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- United States v. Ted Stevenson Angwin and Christine KhamisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- United States v. HermanekCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. FreemanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Mark Stephan v. Unum Life Insurance Company OfCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
94 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.