HATHEWAY

v.

EIDSON, WARDEN

Citator

Cited By

• Nathan v. Tenna Corp., 560 F.2d 761 (7th Cir. 1977)
  …olicy.” Restatement of Contracts, § 512 (1932) (emphasis added); see Lewy v. Standard Plunger Elevator Co., 296 Ill. 295, 300, 129 N.E. 775 (1921); Buckley v. Coyne Electrical School, Inc., 343 Ill.App. 420, 428, 99 N.E. 2d 370 (1951), cert. denied, 342 U.S. 927, 72 S.Ct. 366, 96 L.Ed. 691 (1952). Looking at the instant case in light of the above, it seems clear to us that public policy dictates that we deny the plaintiff’s claim. Nathan’s conduct was sufficiently serious in character to prevent the courts…
• United States v. Aderman, 209 F.2d 777 (7th Cir. 1954)
  …0, after trial by the court without a jury, on an indictment in two counts based on 18 U.S.C. §§ 80 and 88, now 18 U.S.C. §§ 287 and 371, was sustained by this court in 191 F. 2d 980. Within sixty days after the Supreme Court had denied cer-tiorari, 342 U.S. 927, 72 S.Ct. 366, 96 L.Ed. 691, defendant filed in the District Court a motion under Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 18 U.S.C., seeking reduction of his sentence, claiming that he had been charged and convicted under the Sections qu…
• United States v. Aderman, 216 F.2d 564 (7th Cir. 1954)
  …in considerable detail a statement of the evidence (commencing on page 982), reference to which is made in order to avoid repetition. We held that the facts disclosed supported the judgment. Subsequent to denial of certiorari by the Supreme Court, 342 U.S. 927, 72 S.Ct. 366, 96 L.Ed. 691, defendant filed in the District Court a motion to reduce sentence, contending that the court had sentenced him under the wrong provisions of the statute, which contention was in part sustained. Thereafter, on February 18…