Legal Opinion

Frank Guido v. City of Schenectady, George B. Reynolds, Raymond Wemple

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided November 25, 1968No. 30, Docket 31217PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LUMBARD, Chief Judge:

In July, 1958 Frank Guido was convicted in Schenectady Police Court of being a common gambler. The conviction was based on wiretap evidence of telephone conversations to which he was a party. In 1960 he brought suit in the Northern District to recover over $10,000 in damages allegedly resulting from the introduction of the wiretap evidence in the State trial, in violation of Section 605 of the Federal Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. § 605. Chief Judge Foley dismissed the complaint and entered judgment for defendants. We affirm.

During an investigation of gambling…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Linkletter v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  2. Wolf v. ColoradoSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  3. Schwartz v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  4. Lee v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  5. Fuller v. AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Orth-O-Vision, Inc. v. Home Box OfficeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1979
  2. Fine v. ESPN, Inc.District Court, N.D. New York · 2014
  3. Chartwell Communications Group v. WestbrookCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1980
  4. Ciminelli v. CablevisionDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1984
  5. Home Box Office, Inc. v. Advanced Consumer Technology, Movie Antenna, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1981

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API