SUSSMAN ET AL.

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Cianchetti, 315 F.2d 584 (2d Cir. 1963)
  …9); United States v. Martel, 17 F.R.D. 326, 328-329 (N.D.N.Y. 1954); Orfield, The Federal Grand Jury, 22 F.R.D. 343, 452 (1958) ; cf. United States v. Labate, 270 F. 2d 122, 123-24 (3d Cir.), cert. denied sub. nom. Suss- [*592] man v. United States, 361 U.S. 900, 80 S.Ct. 211, 4 L.Ed.2d 157 (1959); 28 U.S.C. § 753. Single Conspiracy. It is contended that the Government’s proof revealed not a single continuing conspiracy, but a series of separate and distinct conspiracies each existing at a different point…
• United States v. Grosso, 358 F.2d 154 (3d Cir. 1966)
  …incompetent. Lawn v. United States, 355 U.S. 339, 349, 350, 78 S.Ct. 311, 2 L.Ed.2d 321 (1958); Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, 363, 364, 76 S.Ct. 406, 100 L.Ed. 397 (1956); United States v. Labate, 270 F. 2d 122 (3rd Cir. 1959), cert. den. 361 U.S. 900,.80 S.Ct. 211, 4 L.Ed.2d 157; Coppedge v. United States, 114 U.S.App. D.C. 79, 311 F. 2d 128, 132 (1962), reversed on other grounds 369 U.S. 438, 82 [*164] S.Ct. 917, 8 L.Ed.2d 21; United States v. Aviles, 274 F. 2d 179, 191 (2nd Cir. 1960). ALLEGE…
• Asarco, Inc. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 777 F.2d 764 (D.C. Cir. 1985)
  …to show cause why, in light of the withdrawal of AEPCO and Willcox, the petitions of SoCal, PG & E, CalPUC and ASARCO should not be dismissed. This opinion arises out of that order. . In City of Corinth v. FPC, 268 F. 2d 10 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 900, 80 S.Ct. 209, 4 L.Ed.2d 156 (1959), the court declined to accept jurisdiction in a related context that arguably presented a stronger case for review. There the petitioner sought to challenge on Mobile-Sierra grounds not the initial acceptance for…