THOMAS

v.

ILLINOIS

Citator

Cited By (16 total)

• United States v. Lamont Arnold Zemek, 634 F.2d 1159 (9th Cir. 1980)
  …d transmit information. The Third Circuit, relying on case law construing similar statutes, has held actual knowledge is not required and a “reasonably founded” belief will suffice. See United States v. Kozak, 438 F. 2d 1062 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 996, 91 S.Ct. 2180, 29 L.Ed.2d 162 (1971). See also, United States v. San Martin, 515 F. 2d 317 (5th Cir. 1975) (defendant knew or “reasonably believed” person had information). The jury instruction in this case asked whether defendants knew or believe…
• Transamerican Freight Lines, Inc. v. Brada Miller Freight Sys., Inc., 423 U.S. 28 (U.S. 1975)
  …day regulate or even proscribe indemnification as between lessee and lessor.7 We merely hold that the present regulations may not be so interpreted. See Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 437 F. 2d 6, 9-10 (CA7), cert. denied, 402 U. S. 996 (1971). We therefore find ourselves in disagreement with the Court of Appeals. We emphasize that our disagreement must- be viewed in the light of the narrow character of the Court of Appeals’ holding to the effect that the indemnification clause in…
• Lewis v. Baune, 534 F.2d 1115 (5th Cir. 1976)
  …zed in federal admiralty courts, see, e. g., Leathers Best, Inc. v. S.S. Mormaclynx, 2 Cir. 1971, 451 F. 2d 800; Beverly Hills National Bank & Trust Company v. Compania De Navegacione Almirante, S.A. Panama, 9 Cir. 1971, 437 F. 2d 301, cert. denied, 402 U.S. 996, 91 S.Ct. 2173, 29 L.Ed.2d 161. . It could be persuasively argued that the literal language of the District Court’s injunction prohibits any type of settlement between the parties even if the attorneys were present. A reading of the record indicate…