18 U.S.C. § 23
Court of the United States defined
As used in this title, except where otherwise expressly provided 2
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1943–2026 · leading case: United States Ex Rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S. 537 (1943).
United States Ex Rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S. 537 (1943). “Some such statutes are 18 U.S.C. § 23 (arming vessels against friendly powers); 31 U.”
United States v. Peter E. Clay, 832 F.3d 1259 (11th Cir. 2016). “18 U.S.C. §§ 23 (b), 1035(b). The parties do not contest that the Florida Medicaid program administered by *1295 AHCA meets the definition of "health care benefit program.”
Free Enter. Fund v. Pub. Co. Acct. Oversight Bd., 561 U.S. 477 (2010). “§§631 (a), (i), and 18 U. S. C. §§23 , 3602(a). Department Statutory Removal Provision “Any member of the Board, including the Chemical Safety Chairperson, may be removed for 1 Board inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”
United States v. Richard Shaffer, 807 F.3d 943 (8th Cir. 2015). “In section 6001(4), “a court of the United States” is defined to include “a United States bankruptcy court established under chapter 6, title 28, United States Code, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, the District Court of…”
Vickers Assocs., Ltd. v. Urice (In Re Jaritz Indus., Ltd.), 207 B.R. 451 (D.V.I. 1997). “2128 (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 23 ). The fact that the Congress has added another patch to cover the symptom does not redress the fundamental, underlying problem in this civil context.”
Free Enter. Fund v. Pub. Co. Acct. Oversight Bd., 177 L. Ed. 2d 706 (2010). “, instances of “double for-cause” removal that are essentially indistinguishable from this case (with the notable exception that the Accounting Board may not be statutorily subject to two layers of for-cause removal, cf.”
Vickers Assocs., Ltd. v. Urice, 207 B.R. 451 (D.V.I. 1997). “In 1994, the Congress added an amendment to Title 18, United tates Code, making the District Court of the Virgin Islands a court of the United States for purposes of federal criminal prosecutions.”
United States v. Matthews, 58 F. Supp. 3d 115 (D.D.C. 2014). “See 18 U.S.C. § 23 ("As used in [Title 18], except where otherwise expressly provided the term 'court of the United States’ includes the District Court of Guam, the District Court for the Northern Mariana - Islands, and the District Court of the Virgin Islands.”
Free Enter. Fund v. Pub. Co. Acct. Oversight Bd., 561 U.S. 477 (2010). “This list does not include instances of “double for-cause” removal that arise in Article I courts, although such instances might also be affected by the majority’s holding, cf.”
United States v. Hodge, 77 F. Supp. 2d 674 (D.V.I. 1999). “" See 18 U.S.C. § 23 . The defendant's other suggestion that the United States Attorney has violated the United States Attorneys' Manual is similarly without merit.”
United States v. Richardson Dangleben, Jr. (3rd Cir. 2026). “at *4 (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 23 ). And under 48 U.S.C. § 1612 (c), “the District Court of the Virgin Islands has concurrent jurisdiction over local Virgin Islands offenses if those offenses arise out of the same transaction as a federal offense.”
Irizarry v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2020). “§§ 5 , 7), the United States courts and their powers ( 18 U.S.C. §§ 23 , 3041), the contents of detention orders ( 18 U.”
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.