green
Positive treatment
4.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1970 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1970
1998
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Harry J. Diduck v. Kaszycki & Sons Contractors, Inc.
See United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796, 809 (2d Cir.1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed.2d 420 (1970). 16 In assessing whether the knowledge element of fraud was satisfied as to Senyshyn, it is helpful to consider his challenged conduct in three segments: his conduct as shop steward; his conduct during Osijuk's tenure as shop steward; and the period prior to Local 95's beginning work in March 1980.
cited
Cited "see"
Diduck v. Kaszycki & Sons Contractors, Inc.
See United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796, 809 (2d Cir.1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed.2d 420 (1970).
discussed
Cited "see"
Matter of Extradition of Tang Yee-Chun
It is a crime to make false entries in the books of a national bank or savings institution, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1005 , 1006; see Matter of Sindona, supra, 450 F.Supp. at 692 ; to make false statements in any matter within the jurisdiction of any United States department or agency, 18 U.S.C. § 1001 ; see United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796, 798 (2d Cir.1969) (false corporate financial statements), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed. *1067 2d 420 (1970); and to use mail or wire communication to execute a scheme to defraud, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 , 1343.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Charles Thomas
See United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796 (2d Cir. 1969), cert, denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed.2d 420 (1970); Bentel v. United States, 13 F.2d 327, 329 (2d Cir.) cert, denied sub nom.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Chicarelli
See United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796, 812-813 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , S. Ct. 1235, 25 L.Ed. 420 (1970); Turpin v. United States, 108 U.S.App.D.C. 274 , 281 F.2d 637, 639 (1960). 29 In Turpin v. United States, supra at 639, the Chief Justice of the United States (then a Circuit Judge) stated that even if the jury had known that defense counsel's objection to their request to see a map which had not been offered in evidence had prevented them from receiving the map, 'it is difficult to see how * * * this information, if known to the jury, prejudiced appellant.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Chicarelli
See United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796, 812-813 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed. 420 (1970); Turpin v. United States, 108 U.S.App.D.C. 274 , 281 F.2d 637, 639 (1960).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Hyman Abrams
See United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796 (2d Cir. Nov. 12, 1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed.2d 420 (1970); Bentel v. United States, 13 F.2d 327, 329 (2d Cir.), cert. denied sub nom.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9376, 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 16,355 United States of America v. Anthony C. Sarno and Charles W. Knapp, (Two Cases). United States of America v. Joseph v. Nash
See United States v. Weiner, 578 F.2d 757, 785-86 (9th Cir.) (analyzing "false statement" convictions under various securities laws), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 981 , 99 S.Ct. 568 , 58 L.Ed.2d 651 (1978); see also United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796, 805 (2d Cir.1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed.2d 420 (1970).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Sarno
See United States v. Weiner, 578 F.2d 757, 785-86 (9th Cir.) (analyzing “false statement” convictions under various securities laws), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 981 , 99 S.Ct. 568 , 58 L.Ed.2d 651 (1978); see also United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796, 805 (2d Cir.1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed.2d 420 (1970).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Crazy Eddie Securities Litigation
See also United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed.2d 420 (1970) (affirming criminal conviction of accountants, under section 32(a) and other statutes, who knowingly drew up and certified false and misleading corporate financial statements where jury could find that accountants knew of looting by the corporate President).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Oppenheimer-Palmieri Fund, L.P. v. Peat Marwick Main & Co.
See also United States v. Simon, 425 F.2d 796 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed.2d 420 (1970) (affirming criminal conviction of accountants, under section 32(a) and other statutes, who knowingly drew up and certified false and misleading corporate financial statements where jury could find that accountants knew of looting by the corporate President).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Russell
See United States v. Sussman, supra, 37 F. Supp. at 296 ; see also United States v. Simon, 425 F. 2d 796 (2 Cir.1969), cert. den. 397 U.S. 1006 , 90 S.Ct. 1235 , 25 L.Ed.2d 420 (1970) (both cases involving criminal prosecutions for violations of provisions of the federal securities law). *350 In the few jurisdictions that have decided the question of whether a criminal intent is necessary under the criminal penalty section of the Uniform Securities Act, the courts appear to have required only an intent to do the proscribed act.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Amalgamated Association of Street, Electric Railway & Motor Coach Employees of America
v.
Lockridge
v.
Lockridge
No. 1072.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 30, 1970.
Isaac N. Groner and Earle W. Putnam for petitioners. Robert W. Green for respondent.
Published
Sup. Ct. Idaho. Cer-tiorari granted.