Legal Opinion

United States v. Dierker

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 19, 1958No. Cr. 15390PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARSH, District Judge.

As stated by the defendant, the information under consideration “alleges that Nicholas A. Stirone * * * violated the Hobbs Anti-Racketeering Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951. The manner in which Stirone allegedly committed such offense was by obstructing, delaying and affecting interstate commerce in materials and supplies used in making ready-mixed concrete for use in constructing a steel processing plant, whose product was to be transported in interstate commerce. It is alleged that Stirone thus affected interstate commerce from September 1, 1951 through December 31, 1953, by…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Wong Tai v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. United States v. CookSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  3. Dunlop v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  4. Ledbetter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  5. Hardy v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1902

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Russell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. United States v. Anthony ProvenzanoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1964
  3. United States v. PersicoDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1985
  4. United States v. BloomDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1977
  5. United States v. John J. CritchleyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1965

9 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