Harold W. Marvin v. United States (1960)
green
· 36 citation events
across 9 courts.
Showing the 12 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1962 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
196219942026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
United States v. Raymond J. Ryan (1972)
Stirone v. United States, 361 U.S. 212 , 80 S.Ct. 270 , 4 L.Ed.2d 252 (1960); Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451, 452 (10th Cir. 1960); United States v. Smith, 232 F.2d 570, 573 (3d Cir. 1956).
green
United States v. Mullins (2010)
United States v. Roylance, 690 F.2d 164, 167 (10th Cir.1982) (quoting Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451, 454 (10th Cir.1960)). 2 That is, we are concerned with whether “the use of the wires ... in the ordinary course of business,” not the precise use of “this or that wire,” was known or reasonably foreseeable to someone in Ms. Mullins’s position.
green
United States v. David W. Warren (1984)
The Supreme Court has held that one causes the use of the mails when he “does an act with knowledge that the use of the mails will follow in the ordinary course of business, or where such use can reasonably be foreseen, even though not actually intended.” Pereira, 347 U.S. at 8-9 , 74 S.Ct. at 362-363 (quoted in United States v. Maze, 414 U.S. 395, 399 , 94 S.Ct. 645, 647 , 38 L.Ed.2d 603 (1974)); see also United States v. Roylance, 690 F.2d 164 , *1345 167 (10th Cir.1982); …
green
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Grant H. ROYLANCE, Defendant-Appellant (1982)
“To establish that the several uses of the mail [are] caused by defendant it [is] sufficient to show that he set forces in motion which foreseeably would involve mail uses.” Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451, 454 (10th Cir. 1960).
green
United States v. Lawrence Jerome Ring (1975)
Petschel v. United States, 369 F.2d 769 (8th Cir. 1966); Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451, 454 (10th Cir. 1960); Greenbaum v. United States, 80 F.2d 113, 125 (9th Cir. 1935); Cochran v. United States, 41 F.2d 193, 205 (8th Cir. 1930).
green
United States v. John Sherman Miles (1973)
Similarly, it has been observed: “To establish that the several uses of the mail were caused by defendant, it was sufficient to show that he set forces in motion which foreseeably would involve mail uses.” Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451, 454 (10th Cir. 1960).
green
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,539 United States of America v. Wendell Warren Austin, United States of America v. Wil… (1972)
Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451, 454 (10th Cir. 1960); Milam v. United States, 322 F.2d 104, 109 (5th Cir. 1963).
green
United States v. Austin (1972)
Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451, 454 (10th Cir. 1960); Milam v. United States, 322 F.2d 104, 109 (5th Cir. 1963).
green
United States v. Eddie Lee Cowley (1971)
Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451, 453 (10th Cir. 1960).
green
United States v. James G. Sorce, Jr. (1962)
See Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1, 8-9 , 74 S.Ct. 358 , 98 L.Ed. 435 (1954); Kann v. United States, 323 U.S. 88 , 65 S.Ot. 148, 89 L.Ed. 88 (1944); Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451, 454 (10th Cir. 1960); Williams v. United States, 278 F.2d 535, 538 (9th Cir. 1960); Gregory v. United States, 253 F.2d 104, 109-110 (5th Cir. 1958); Stevens v. United States, 227 F.2d 5 (8th Cir. 1955).
green
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,326 United States of America v. Richard MacKay and Chester Brewer (1974)
See Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451 (10th Cir. 1960).
green
United States v. Frank Allen Blosser (1971)
See Marvin v. United States, 279 F.2d 451, 452 (10th Cir.) ; and United States v. Sorce, 308 F.2d 299 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 957 , 84 S.Ct. 1635 , 12 L.Ed.2d 500 . 3 .