FOREMAN & CLARK, INC.

v.

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Terry, 702 F.2d 299 (2d Cir. 1983)
  …United States v. Cheung Kin Ping, 555 F. 2d 1069, 1073-74 (2d Cir.1977). Although we long ago held that the giving of a “community impact” instruction was not reversible error, United States v. Witt, 215 F. 2d 580, 585 n. 4 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 348 U.S. 887, 75 S.Ct. 207, 99 L.Ed. 697 (1954), we have disapproved of similar statements when made by a prosecutor as tending to divert the jury from consideration of the evidence, United States v. Barlin, 686 F. 2d 81, 93 (2d Cir.1982). For the same reason…
• United States v. Egger, 470 F.2d 1179 (9th Cir. 1972)
  …ries and of Lacey’s role in disposing of the money was admissible “to show the way the conspiracy came into being and its modus opercmdi when it operated.” United States v. Witt, 215 F. 2d 580, 583 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, Talanker v. United States, 348 U.S. 887, 75 S.Ct. 207, 99 L.Ed. 697 (1954). The appellants have urged other errors, but none presents a point which requires discussion. Affirmed.…