Legal Opinion

The Sagatind

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided April 5, 1926No. 322-325PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOUGH, Cireuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). The material facts are very few, and we think it clear that they were well known to the governmental authorities before libels filed; a closer attention to them would have prevented a nightmare of pleading, but that pleading occurred before the appointment of the present United States attorney.

Of the allegations of fact above enumerated, some are false. Thus it is untrue that cither vessel ever voluntarily came within four leagues of this coast; there is no pretense of evidence that Sagatind “made contact” with the shore by means of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Romano v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
  2. United States v. 1,250 Cases of Intoxicating LiquorsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1923
  3. The PanamaDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1925
  4. United States v. 2,180 Cases of ChampaigneCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. The SquantoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
  2. The PictonianCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1927
  3. Ducos v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1926
  4. Hennings v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1926
  5. United States v. 3,599 Bags of LiquorCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926

1 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