U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART I— CRIMES › Chapter CHAPTER 83— POSTAL SERVICE

18 U.S.C. § 1694

Carriage of matter out of mail over post routes

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

Whoever, having charge or control of any conveyance operating by land, air, or water, which regularly performs trips at stated periods on any post route, or from one place to another between which the mail is regularly carried, carries, otherwise than in the mail, any letters or packets, except such as relate to some part of the cargo of such conveyance, or to the current business of the carrier, or to some article carried at the same time by the same conveyance, shall, except as otherwise provided by law, be fined under this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case: Regents of the Univ. v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd., 485 U.S. 589 (1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Regents of the Univ. v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd., 485 U.S. 589 (1988). · cites it 6× “On remand, PERB found this HEERA requirement to be consistent with federal law because it determined that the carriage involved was within two different exceptions to the Private Express Statutes, namely the "letters-of-the-carrier" exception, 18 U. S. C. § 1694 ; 39 CFR § 310.3…”
Rivko Knox v. Mark Brnovich, 907 F.3d 1167 (9th Cir. 2018). “” 18 U.S.C. § 1694 ; Regents, 485 U.S. at 594 .”
Fort Wayne Cmty. Schs. v. Fort Wayne Educ. Ass'n, Inc., & United States Postal Serv., 977 F.2d 358 (7th Cir. 1993). · cites it 2× “The School Corporation brought a declaratory judgment action naming the Association and the United States Postal Service (Postal Service) as defendants in order to determine whether its carriage of the Association’s letters to the teachers violated 18 U.S.C. § 1694 . 1 The…”
Chandler v. Am. Gen. Fin., Inc., 768 N.E.2d 60 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “Emery was a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) claim ( 18 U.S.C. § 1694 (1994)), based on mail fraud.”
Regents of Univ. of California v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd., 220 Cal. App. 3d 346 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990). “1 The ATJ’s findings on those points were equivocal, however (see section V, post), and the Board resolved the federal law issue on broader grounds. It concluded that the delivery of union communications was entirely excepted from the postal monopoly because it came within the…”
Council of Greenburgh Civic Associations v. United States Postal Serv., 448 F. Supp. 159 (S.D.N.Y. 1978). “The Court rejects plaintiffs’ argument, raised for the first time in its reply brief, that the direct deposit of non-postaged mail in letter boxes by civic organizations is protected from regulation under § 1725 by the operation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1694 and 1696(c). These statutes…”
Fort Wayne Cmty. Schs. v. Fort Wayne Educ. Ass'n, 742 F. Supp. 1031 (N.D. Ind. 1990). “The “letters-of-the-carrier” exception appears at 18 U.S.C. § 1694 and provides: Whoever ..”
Eiland v. United States Postal Serv. (E.D. Mo. 2022). · cites it 3× “He asserts that the Court has federal question jurisdiction based on the following six federal statutes: (1) 18 U.S.C. § 1694 ;1 (2) 1 18 U.S.C. § 1694 provides for the levying of a fine for carrying “matter out of mail over post routes.”
Am. Postal Workers Union v. Indep. Postal Serv. of Am., 349 F. Supp. 1297 (E.D. Mich. 1972). “on, AFL-CIO, Detroit Local, seeks to enjoin the defendants from conducting a private postal system for profit on the grounds that defendants’ actual and contemplated business is in derogation of the postal monopoly conferred upon the United States Government by Article I,…”
Eiland v. United States Postal Serv. (E.D. Mo. 2022). · cites it 2× “118 U.S.C. § 1694 provides for the levying of a fine for carrying “matter out of mail over post routes.”
Ferguson v. Credit One LLC (E.D.N.C. 2024). · cites it 2× “Ferguson sought to reference 18 U.S.C. § 1694 ,2 this statute references criminal penalties for illegal mail conveyance and does 2 The undersigned notes that no 15 U.”
Eiland v. United States Postal Serv. (E.D. Mo. 2022). “First, there was a July 28, 2021 letter from the USPS to plaintiff, advising him that his administrative tort claim had been assigned to an examiner.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
18 U.S.C. § 1694(c): 1 case
Grimm v. GPG Processing, LLC (S.D. Ohio 2019).
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.