CHICAGO, BURLINGTON & QUINCY RAILROAD CO.

v.

STATE TAX COMMISSION OF MISSOURI ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (22 total)

• United States v. Bohonus, 628 F.2d 1167 (9th Cir. 1980)
  …. 2d 369, 373 (9th Cir. 1960); United States v. Beecroft, 608 F. 2d 753, 757 (9th Cir. 1979). Thus, the fraud must be active, not merely constructive. Post v. United States, 132 U.S.App.D.C. 189, 199, 407 F. 2d 319, 329 (D.C. Cir. 1968), cert. den., 393 U.S. 1092, 89 S.Ct. 863, 21 L.Ed.2d 784 (1969). The government proves specific intent if it proves that the scheme was “reasonably calculated to deceive persons of ordinary prudence and comprehension.” Irwin v. United States, 338 F. 2d 770, 773 (9th Cir. 1964…
• United States v. McDONALD, 576 F.2d 1350 (9th Cir. 1978)
• United States v. Goss, 650 F.2d 1336 (5th Cir. 1981)
  …d States v. McDonald, 576 F. 2d 1350, 1359 n.14 (9th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., 439 U.S. 830, 99 S.Ct. 105, 58 L.Ed.2d 124, 439 U.S. 927, 99 S.Ct. 312, 58 L.Ed.2d 320 (1978); Post v. United States, 407 F. 2d 319, 329 (D.C.Cir.1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1092, 89 S.Ct. 863, 21 L.Ed.2d 784 (1969) (breach of fiduciary duty does not itself constitute active fraud and proof of specific intent to defraud is required). It was, therefore, correct to charge the jury that Benson’s breach of his fiduciary duty to…

  ← 1 / 2 →