Whoever stipulates for or gives or receives, or consents or agrees to give or receive, any fee, commission, bonus, or thing of value for procuring or endeavoring to procure from any Federal Reserve bank any advance, loan, or extension of credit or discount or purchase of any obligation or commitment with respect thereto, either directly from such Federal Reserve bank or indirectly through any financing institution, unless such fee, commission, bonus, or thing of value and all material facts with respect to the arrangement or understanding therefor shall be disclosed in writing in the application or request for such advance, loan, extension of credit, discount, purchase, or commitment, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Shirey (1959)
scotus · cites it 18×
“On July 23, 1954, an information was filed in the District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania charging appellee with a violation of 18 U. S. C. § 214 (originally § 1 of the Act of December 11, 1926, 44 Stat.”
Durso v. SUMMER BROOK PRESERVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION (2008)
flmd
“3 ) Four counts allege violations of federal statutes: (1) unlawful debt collection under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (Count I); (2) violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (Count II); harassment under 18 U.S.C. § 214 (Count V); and…”
United States v. Myers (1982)
ca2
“Early in the colloquy with counsel, Judge Pratt had suggested that it would be “kind of a far-out view” if the jury thought that on October 20, Murphy “really didn’t accept [the money] for his own benefit” and was “giving it up to Howard Criden with no further claims on it.”
United States v. Samuel Walker (2015)
ca5
“2d at 1099 (holding that conspiring to deny citizens of their civil rights in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 214 is a crime of violence). We believe that conspiring to use interstate commerce with the intent of committing a murder-for-hire clearly involves a substantial risk of…”
Tower v. United States (1959)
cusc
“Applying these generalities to the immediate occasion, it is clear that the terms, the history, and the manifest purpose of 18 U.S.C. § 214 coalesce in a construction of that statute which validates the information against Shirey.”
United States v. Shirey (1958)
pamd
“” As above indicated, this Information was brought under 18 U.S.C. § 214 which. reads as follows: “Offer to procure appointive public office “Whoever pays or offers or promises any money or thing of value, to any person, firm, or corporation in consideration of the use or…”
(PS) Castaneda v. State of CA DMV (2024)
caed
“However, considering all of the statements in 21 the Complaint and citations to various laws, and the attached “Determination and Notice of 22 2 The Complaint indicates that Defendants violated 18 U.S.C. § 214 , but this appears to be a 23 typographical mistake.”
Trimble v. United States (2025)
txnd
“Claims under 18 U.S.C. §§ 214 or 242 In addition to asserting causes of action under the federal civil rights statutes, Plaintiff also asserts the United States violated 18 U.”
In re McKaba (1985)
nyappdiv
“The petition herein alleged that on March 12, 1984, respondent entered a plea of guilty in the United States District Court for the Eastern *80 District of New York to an information which charged that he had violated 18 USC § 214 . This information charged that: “On or about…”
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.