Legal Opinion

United States v. Goldfarb

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided April 30, 1948No. 274, Docket 20991PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Per curiam

The appellant has been adjudged guilty of wilfully failing to obey a grand jury subpoena duces tecum which required him to appear on March 4, 1948. The subpoena was served upon him personally on March 1st and witness fees were tendered. On the morning of March 4th, an attorney appeared outside the grand jury room and informed an assistant United States Attorney that he represented Goldfarb and that Goldfarb could not appear because of an important business engagement but was willing to appear at a later day. The grand jury promptly voted a presentment that Goldfarb be punished for contempt…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Eustace v. LynchCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1935
  2. United States v. GoldsteinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,322 Securities and Exchange Commission v. First Financial Group of Texas, Inc., William H. HowtonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1981
  2. Securities & Exchange Commission v. MusellaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1993
  3. United States v. George ReminiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
  4. Carlson v. United States (Three Cases)Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1954
  5. United States v. Albert B. SnyderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970

15 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