green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.6 score
“in criminal actions, the constitutional unit of venue is the district, not the division.”
Treatment trajectory · 1978 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1978
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 32 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Bryan S. Couch
(2×)
But cf. United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407, 418-21 (5th Cir.1977) (conviction for RICO conspiracy that straddled effective date of statute reversed where bulk of proof predated statute and jury was not instructed about effective date of § 1962(d) or that government must demonstrate existence of conspiracy after that date), cert. denied sub nom., Seymour v. United States, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "but see"
Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno
(2×)
But see DeMateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F. 2d 895, 899 (CA3 1977) (dictum) (principle that § 1404(a) transfer should not result in change in law is no less applicable to dismissal on grounds of forum non conveniens ), cert. denied, 435 U. S. 904 (1978).
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Faulkner
in criminal actions, the constitutional unit of venue is the district, not the division.
discussed
Cited "see"
Mario Micomonaco v. State Of Washington
See DeMateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F.2d 895, 899 (3d Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978). 29 In contrast, the final sentence of section 47.60.210 assigns the proper venue for suits brought under the provision in state courts ("The venue of such actions may be in the superior court for Thurston County or the county where the injury occurred").
cited
Cited "see"
Micomonaco v. Washington
See DeMateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F.2d 895, 899 (3d Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. James J. \Buck\" Allemand
(2×)
See United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407, 419 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Rudisill v. Sheraton Copenhagen Corp.
If the competing courts are U.S. federal trial courts, Title 28 of the United States Code, section 1404(a) mitigates the harshness of the doctrine of forum non conveniens by allowing the district court to transfer the case “[f]or the convenience of [the] parties and witnesses, [and] in the interest of justice” to another federal trial court, instead of dismissing the action outright. 28 U.S.C. § 1404 (a); see DeMateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F.2d 895, 899 (3d Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L,Ed.2d 494 (1978) (explaining that § 1404(a) “mitigates the possible ha…
discussed
Cited "see"
National Labor Relations Board v. California Horse Racing Board, and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union 1501
See NLRB v. Committee of Interns & Residents, 566 F.2d 810 (2d Cir.1977) (state regulation preempted where Board had asserted jurisdiction but had determined that workers at issue were not entitled to collective bargaining rights under NLRA), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 495 (1978); NLRB v. State of New York, 436 F.Supp. 335 (E.D.N.Y.1977), aff’d, 591 F.2d 1331 (2d Cir.1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Harilaos Kukias v. Chandris Lines, Inc.
As correctly noted by defendants, in Rhoditis the Supreme Court stated that “the shipowner’s base of operations is another factor of importance in determining whether the Jones Act is applicable; and there well may be others.” Rhoditis, 398 U.S. at 309 , 90 S.Ct. at 1734 (emphasis in original); see DeMateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F.2d 895, 901 (3d Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bert R. Slocum and Louise v. Slocum, United States of America v. Bert R. Slocum, Louise v. Slocum, Ray B. Slocum, Doris Fuller, Francille Miller
(2×)
See United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407, 420 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978). 13 In Brady, the government prosecutor, despite Brady's pre-trial request to examine a co-defendant's extra-judicial statements, withheld a statement in which the co-defendant admitted performing the actual killing for which the defendants were indicted.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Slocum
(2×)
See United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407, 420 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Sports Eye, Inc. v. Daily Racing Form, Inc.
See DeMateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F.2d 895, 900 (3d Cir.1977) (quoting Gulf Oil Co. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 509 , 67 S.Ct. 839, 843 , 91 L.Ed. 1055 (1947)), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978). *640 In this case, the need for a California court to hear the state law tort claims is particularly acute.
discussed
Cited "see"
Maria Arlete Vaz Borralho v. Keydril Company, Key International Drilling Company, Ltd. And Key Perfuracoes Maritimas, Ltda.
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See DeMateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F.2d 895 , 902 n. 3 (3d Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. David Michael Kelly
See United States v. Powell, 564 F.2d 256, 259 (8th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 495 (1978); United States v. Blake, 484 F.2d 50, 58 (8th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 949 , 94 S.Ct. 3076 , 41 L.Ed.2d 669 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Tom Welch, Charles Cashell, William L. Satterwhite and James M. Cochran
(2×)
See United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407 , 418 n.22 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978); United States v. Crockett, 506 F.2d 759 (5th Cir.) (in context of prosecution pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 1955 , trial court did not err in failing to give jury the Georgia statutory language making gambling illegal), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 824 , 96 S.Ct. 37 , 46 L.Ed.2d 40 (1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bill R. Clark
(2×)
See United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407 , 415 n.15 (5th Cir. 1977) (RICO is “plain on its face” and covers government agencies), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Harold R. Dodson v. National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration
(2×)
Accord, Alabama Association of Insurance Agents v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 533 F.2d 224, 236 (5th Cir. 1976), vacated in part, 558 F.2d 729 (1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bright
(2×)
See United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978). 44 135 Thus, the essential question in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence on the substantive RICO count is whether there was sufficient proof that each defendant was associated with the Sheriff's office and participated in the conduct of the Sheriff's office affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity. 45 136 a.
discussed
Cited "see"
Reyno v. Piper Aircraft Company
Co., 218 F.2d 353, 357 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 349 U.S. 922 , 75 S.Ct. 661 , 99 L.Ed. 1254 (1955); see Founding Church of Scientology v. Verlag, 536 F.2d 429, 436 (D.C.Cir.1976) (difficulty in applying German law not sufficient) 50 420 F.2d at 427 51 DeMateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F.2d 895, 899 (3d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Bright
(2×)
See United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978). 44 Thus, the essential question in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence oh the substantive RICO count is whether there was sufficient proof that each defendant was associated with the Sheriff’s office and participated in the conduct of the Sheriff’s office affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity. 45 a.
discussed
Cited "see"
Allan v. Brown & Root, Inc.
See, De Mateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F.2d 895, 899-900 (3d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978); Bartholomew v. Universe Tankships, Inc., 263 F.2d 437, 443 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 1000 , 79 S.Ct. 1138 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1030 (1959).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Steel Corp. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Republic Steel Corporation v. Environmental Protection Agency
(2×)
See Alabama Ass’n of Insurance Agents v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 533 F.2d 224, 236 (CA5, 1976), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978); Unification Church v. Attorney General for the U. S., 189 U.S. App.D.C. 92, 94-95, 581 F.2d 870 , 872-73, cert. denied,-U.S.-, 99 S.Ct. 102 , 58 L.Ed.2d 122 (1978); Haltmier v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n, 554 F.2d 556, 562 (CA2, 1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Adela Nancy Del Valle, Morry S. Fox, James A. Davis, II and Irving Curtis
(2×)
See United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Edward A. Thomas
(2×)
See also United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407 , 418 n. 22 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Paone
See, e.g., United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407 , 418 n. 22 (5 Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 (1978) (rejecting Georgia's accomplice testimony corroboration requirement in a RICO prosecution); United States v. Licavoli, supra, 725 F.2d at 1047 , and cases cited therein (even though Ohio law precludes separate punishment for conspiracy to murder and murder, each can serve as separate predicate act in a RICO prosecution). 36 We hold that the district court correctly ruled that the New York corroboration of accomplice testimony requirement is not incorporated in a RICO prosecution.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Paone
See, e.g., United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407 , 418 n. 22 (5 Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 (1978) (rejecting Georgia’s accomplice testimony corroboration requirement in a RICO prosecution); United States v. Licavoli, supra, 725 F.2d at 1047, and cases cited therein (even though Ohio law precludes separate punishment for conspiracy to murder and murder, each can serve as separate predicate act in a RICO prosecution).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Angelo Pepe and Thomas Miglionico, United States of America v. Albert Joseph Facchiano, Francis Santo, Paul Santo
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407, 425 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978); United States v. Henao, 652 F.2d 591 (5th Cir. Unit B 1981).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Westerby v. Johns-Manville Corp.
See also De Mateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F.2d 895 (3d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 (1978); Fitzgerald v. Texaco, Inc., 521 F.2d 448 (2d Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1052 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Gilbert L. Dozier
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Brown, 555 F.2d 407, 416 (5th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1448 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978) (holding municipal police department to be an “enterprise” within meaning of Hobbs Act).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Fosen v. United Technologies Corp.
Fitzgerald v. Texaco, Inc., supra, 521 F.2d at 454 ; see also De Mateos v. Texaco, Inc., 562 F.2d 895, 900 (3d Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 494 (1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Preston Sellers, United States of America v. Johnnie Caradine, United States of America v. Donald Allen, United States of America v. William E. Jewett, United States of America v. Dennis Lavern English, United States of America v. William James Monroe
See, e. g., United States v. Powell, 564 F.2d 256 (8th Cir. 1977), Cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 495 (1978); United States v. Losing, 560 F.2d 906 (8th Cir.), Cert. denied, 434 U.S. 969 , 98 S.Ct. 516 , 54 L.Ed.2d 457 (1977); United States v. Carlson, 547 F.2d 1346 (8th Cir. 1976), Cert. denied, 431 U.S. 914 , 97 S.Ct. 2174 , 53 L.Ed.2d 224 (1977); United States v. Rich, 518 F.2d 980 (8th Cir. 1975), Cert. denied, 427 U.S. 907 , 96 S.Ct. 3193 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1200 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Sellers
See, e. g., United States v. Powell, 564 F.2d 256 (8th Cir. 1977), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 904 , 98 S.Ct. 1449 , 55 L.Ed.2d 495 (1978); United States v. Losing, 560 F.2d 906 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 969 , 98 S.Ct. 516 , 54 L.Ed.2d 457 (1977); United States v. Carlson, 547 F.2d 1346 (8th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 914 , 97 S.Ct. 2174 , 53 L.Ed.2d 224 (1977); United States v. Rich, 518 F.2d 980 (8th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 427 U.S. 907 , 96 S.Ct. 3193 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1200 (1976).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Alabama Association of Insurance Agents, Inc.
v.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
v.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
No. 77-668.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 27, 1978.
Published
Citer courts: Fifth Circuit (1)
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.