16 U.S.C. § 433
Repealed. Pub. L. 113–287, § 7, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3272
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases, 1974–2008 · leading case: United States v. Kyle R. Jones, Thayde L. Jones & Robert E. Gevara, 607 F.2d 269 (9th Cir. 1979).
United States v. Kyle R. Jones, Thayde L. Jones & Robert E. Gevara, 607 F.2d 269 (9th Cir. 1979). “After reviewing the legislative history of the Antiquities Act, 16 U.S.C. § 433 , and the theft and malicious mischief statutes, 18 U.”
United States v. Peter Larson, 110 F.3d 620 (8th Cir. 1997). “The criminal act alleged at that time was a violation of the Antiquities Act, 16 U.S.C. § 433 . Black Hills Inst, of Geological Research v.”
Gates v. City of Tenakee Springs, 822 P.2d 455 (Alaska 1991). “16 U.S.C. § 433 , provides in part: Any person who shall appropriate, excavate, injure, or destroy any historic or prehistoric ruin .”
Joan M. Klein v. The Unidentified Wrecked & Abandoned Sailing Vessel, Etc., 758 F.2d 1511 (11th Cir. 1985). “In my view, however, such a conclusion is compelled not by the “embedded in the soil” and “constructive possession” exceptions to the common law of finds, which are of dubious relevance in the context of a sunken ship, 1 but rather by the Antiquities Act of 1906, 16 U.S.C. § 433…”
United States v. Corrow, 941 F. Supp. 1553 (D.N.M. 1996). “Both parties agree that the case law examining specific language in the Antiquities Act, 16 U.S.C. § 433 , et seq., may furnish a useful comparison to provisions of NAGPRA.”
Treasure Salvors, Inc. v. Unidentified Wrecked & Abandoned Sailing Vessel, 459 F. Supp. 507 (S.D. Fla. 1978). “The Diaz case held the federal statute 16 U.S.C. § 433 concerning objects of antiquity situated on land owned and controlled by the Government of the United States to be unconstitutionally vague: Nowhere here do we find any definition of such terms as “ruin” or “monument”…”
United States v. William R. Smyer & Byron R. May, 596 F.2d 939 (10th Cir. 1979). “After trial to the court without a jury, the defendants-appellants were found guilty of each count of an eleven-count information charging violations of 16 U.S.C. § 433 which relates to American antiquities.”
Lathrop v. Unidentified, Wrecked & Abandoned Vessel, 817 F. Supp. 953 (M.D. Fla. 1993). “Antiquities Act of 1906, (codified at 16 U.S.C. § 433 ). 17 . Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, (codified at 33 U.”
Quechan Indian Tribe v. United States, 535 F. Supp. 2d 1072 (S.D. Cal. 2008). “In support, the Tribe cites to the Archeological Resources Protection Act, § 470aa-mm, • which discusses archeological resources both on public and Indian lands; the American Antiquities Act, 16 U.S.C. § 433 , which protects historic ruins and objects of antiquity on lands owned…”
Subaqueous Expl. & Archaeology, Ltd. v. Unidentified, Wrecked & Abandoned Vessel, 577 F. Supp. 597 (D. Maryland 1983). “1974), in which the Ninth Circuit held that the federal Antiquities Act, 16 U.S.C. § 433 , was unconstitutionally vague and violated due process because it failed to define “ruin,” “monument,” or “object of antiquity.”
Klein v. Unidentified, Wrecked & Abandoned Sailing Vessel, 568 F. Supp. 1562 (S.D. Fla. 1983). “16 U.S.C. § 433 . 29 . 499 F.2d 113 (9th Cir.”
United States v. Ben Diaz, 499 F.2d 113 (9th Cir. 1974). “OPINION MERRILL, Circuit Judge: Appellant was charged in 1973 with appropriating “objects of antiquity situated on lands owned and controlled by the Government of the United States without the permission of the Secretary of Interior,” contrary to 16 U.S.C. § 433 . 1 *114 The…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.