HOOD ET AL.

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Daniel "Danny Blue Eyes", 583 F.2d 748 (5th Cir. 1978)
  …ith conspiracies, see, e. g., Duke v. United States, 5 Cir. 1956, 233 F. 2d 897; Jolley v. United States, 5 Cir. 1956, 232 F. 2d 83; Owens v. United States, 5 Cir. 1955, 221 F. 2d 351; United States v. Hood, 5 Cir. 1953, 200 F. 2d 639, cert. denied, 345 U.S. 941, 73 S.Ct. 832, 97 L.Ed. 1367 (1953); Baker v. United States, 5 Cir. 1946, 156 F. 2d 386, cert. denied, 329 U.S. 763, 67 S.Ct. 123, 91 L.Ed. 657 (1946); Burk v. United States, 5 Cir. 1943, 134 F. 2d 879; Kopald-Quinn & Co. v. United States, 5 Cir. 19…
• Hal Francis Rachal and Edward B. Hunnicutt v. Grover C. Hill, 435 F.2d 59 (5th Cir. 1970)
  …hout merit. Since no notification was filed with the S.E.C. according to S.E.C. Rule 225, Regulation A, no exemption for the securities can be established. Mines and Metals Corp. v. Securities and Exch. Comm., 9 Cir., 1952, 200 F. 2d 317, cert. den. 345 U.S. 941, 73 S.Ct. 832, 97 L.Ed. 1367. Likewise, the appellants’ contention that the transactions here in question were exempt under § 4 of the 1933 Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 77d, as not involving any public offering is unsupportable as a matter of law. S…
• Enter. Wheel & CAR Corp. v. United Steelworkers OF Am., 269 F.2d 327 (4th Cir. 1959)
  …ployer to discharge the employee is unrestricted. See United Protective Workers of America, Local No. 2 v. Ford Motor Co., 7 Cir., 223 F. 2d 49, 52, 48 A.L.R.2d 1285; Odell v. Humble Oil & Refining Co., 10 Cir., 201 F. 2d 123, 128, certiorari denied 345 U.S. 941, 73 S.Ct. 833, 97 L.Ed. 1367. It follows that in the pending case the discharged men had no right to damages for loss of time under the contract after its expiration and-that the award should be amended so asi to eliminate damages based on the subs…