Legal Opinion

United States v. Roth and Five Other Actions

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided December 11, 1953No. 22752PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Per curiam

Unlike the civil rules, under which the lack of timely appeal here would be quite clear, see Fed.Rules Civ. Proc. rule 58; United States v. Wissahickon Tool Works, 2 Cir., 200 F.2d 936, 939, and cases cited, the federal rules of criminal procedure do not cover the point in issue; and in United States v. Hark, 320 U.S. 531, 534, 64 S.Ct. 359, 361, 88 L.Ed. 290, decided by a divided bench, where it was “Unaided by statute or rule of court,” the Court relied on what it took to be a local practice for the evidencing of decision by later formal orders. A directly contrary practice in the Eastern…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States v. HarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. United States v. RockowerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
  3. United States v. 25.406 Acres of Land in Arlington CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  4. Leonard v. Prince Line, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1946
  5. Soderstrom v. Kungsholm Baking Co. Soderstrom v. CohnCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1950

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Lawn v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  2. United States v. Hyman WinterCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965
  3. United States v. Vincent Moran DossCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1977
  4. United States v. HoffaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1957
  5. United States v. MacKeyDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1975

18 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