Legal Opinion

United States v. Altman

District Court, W.D. New York

Decided November 12, 1934PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KNIGHT, District Judge.

Defendants have demurred to the indictment herein “upon the ground that said indietment does not state facts sufficient to constitute the crime of soliciting rebates and concessions in violation of title 49, § 41, USCA (Elkins Act [section 1, as amended by Hep-bum Act, § 2]).” Demurrers upon the same ground have been filed in several other proceedings. All of such indictments are identical, except as to immaterial matters. The indictments clearly are brought under section 41, tit. 49 USCA.' Their sufficiency under comparable allegations has been sustained in numerous…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Armour Packing Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  2. Williams v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  3. Armour Packing Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
  4. Goode v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  5. Frost v. WenieSupreme Court of the United States · 1895

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. United States v. Satuloff Bros.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935
  2. United States v. O'CONNORDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1955
  3. United States ex rel. Kutler v. HillDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API