Legal Opinion

United States v. Smail

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided March 12, 1928No. 196PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtL. Hand, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). In U. S. v. Gaffney (C. C. A.) 10 F.(2d) 694, where the complicity of the lessee with a sublessee was well established, we held that the lessor might forfeit the lease and re-enter under a decree upon such a cross-bill as that at bar. U. S. v. Duignan, 4 F.(2d) 983 (C. C. A. 2), affirmed 274 U. S. 195, 47 S. Ct. 566, 71 L. Ed. 996, went off on points of practice and cannot be treated as an authority. Grossman v. U. S., 280 F. 683 (C. C. A. 7), involved the cancellation of the lease of a guilty lessee, and Schlieder v. U. S., 11 F.(2d) 345 (C. C. A. 5), and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Duignan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. United States v. GaffneyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
  3. Grossman v. United States ex rel. BrundageCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1922
  4. Schlieder v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1926
  5. United States v. DuignanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. United States v. F. & F. Lunch Room, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API