HART ET AL.

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Dock Perry Glenn and William M. Belvin v. United States, 303 F.2d 536 (5th Cir. 1962)
  …it must have “reasonably contemplated” a use of the mails. Compare Steiner v. United States, 5 Cir., 1943, 134 F. 2d 931, cert. denied, 319 U.S. 774, 63 S.Ct. 1439, 87 L.Ed. 1721 and Hart v. United States, 5 Cir., 1940, 112 F. 2d 128, cert. denied, 311 U.S. 684, 61 S.Ct. 60, 85 L.Ed. 441 with Getchell v. United States, 5 Cir., 1960, 282 F. 2d 681. See also Pereira v. United States, 1954, 347 U.S. 1, 74 S.Ct. 358, 98 L.Ed. 435.1 The appellants’ argument falters on their assertion that their indictments did…
• Bradford v. United States, 129 F.2d 274 (5th Cir. 1942)
  …Using a fiduciary position as a protective committee member to obtain secret profits based upon inside information, is not only a breach of trust, but an active fraud on the bondholders.” See, also, Hart v. United States, 5 Cir., 112 F. 2d 128, Id., 311 U.S. 684, 61 S.Ct. 60, 85 L.Ed. 441. That Commissioner Bradford knew all about the details of the scheme is further indicated by his statement to Harris, foreman of the Rapides Parish grand jury, that Mayor Lamkin himself had received $2,000 out of the frau…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Little v. United States, 331 F.2d 287 (8th Cir. 1964)
  …fice to defraud such duped investors was not dispelled by his deposit of their checks in National and securing credit therefor. Hart, et al. v. United States, 112 F. 2d 128 (5 Cir. 1940), cert. dis. 311 U.S. 722, 61 S.Ct. 6, 85 L.Ed. 471; cert. den. 311 U.S. 684, 61 S.Ct. 60, 85 L.Ed. 441; rehear. den. 311 U.S. 726, 61 S.Ct. 131, 85 L.Ed. 473. Regardless of the language on the deposit slips and the relationship thereby created between National, Star, and appellant, the fact is that appellant’s criminal con…