United States v. One Solid Gold Object in Form of a Rooster
District Court, D. Nevada
1Opinion of the Court
HALBERT, District Judge.
This is the action which was the subject of the memorandum and order reported at D.C., 186 F.Supp. 526. At a pretrial conference, the parties raised two pertinent issues of law. A ruling on each of these issues will greatly facilitate the trial of this case. The parties have made known to me their positions on these matters both by briefs and by oral argument. After a full consideration of these issues, I am now prepared to rule on each.
*199Issue No. I
Must the Government show a specific intent on the part of claimant to violate the Gold Reserve Act of 1934 (Title 31…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Reynolds v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- United States v. ReganSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- United States v. Brig BurdettSupreme Court of the United States · 1835
- Takoma Park Bank v. AbbottCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1941
- United States v. Chabot. United States v. FliegelCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- United States v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1981
- Taylor v. Board of Education of the City School District of New RochelleCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- United States v. Two Hundred Fifty-Four United States Twenty Dollar Gold CoinsDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1973
- Leslie Taylor v. Board Of Education Of The City School District Of The City Of New RochelleCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961