Legal Opinion

Optner v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided May 7, 1926No. 4526PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DONAHUE, Circuit Judge,

(after stating the facts as above). While the dates of the filing and position in the record of the motion, entry, and demurrer would indicate that the demurrer was filed after disposition of the motion, yet we do not think that matter is of serious importance. It is conceded that counts 4 and 5 were properly joined. The sustaining of the motion to quash counts 1, 2, and 3, because the offenses charged therein were barred by the statute of limitation or for any other reason, wholly eliminated the question of misjoinder and obviated the necessity of requiring the United…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Brown v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  2. Pointer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  3. Connors v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  4. McElroy v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  5. Arndstein v. McCarthySupreme Court of the United States · 1920

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. United States v. Joseph Alfred TannerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1972
  2. United States v. LotschCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
  3. Banning v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1942
  4. United States v. CullenDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1969
  5. Bedell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1935

7 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