28 U.S.C. § 544
Oath of office
Each United States attorney, assistant United States attorney, and attorney appointed under section 543 of this title, before taking office, shall take an oath to execute faithfully his duties.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1955–2025 · leading case: Wheeldin v. Wheeler, 373 U.S. 647 (1963).
Wheeldin v. Wheeler, 373 U.S. 647 (1963). “Nor is this an action for breach of a United States marshal's bond, 28 U. S. C. § 544 ; in an earlier phase of the instant litigation, the complaint was dismissed as against a United States marshal and a sheriff as frivolous.”
In Re Bruce R. Lindsey (Grand Jury Testimony), 158 F.3d 1263 (D.C. Cir. 1998). “3; see also 28 U.S.C. § 544 (1994). This is a solemn undertaking, a binding of the person to the cause of constitutional government, an expression of the individual’s allegiance to the principles embodied in that document.”
Virgil Norton, Virgil Wesley & James Chapman v. James P. McShane, 332 F.2d 855 (5th Cir. 1964). “See 28 U.S.C. § 544 (c); cf. Swanson v. Willis, supra n.”
United States v. Pignatiello, 582 F. Supp. 251 (D. Colo. 1984). “” The oath referred to was the oath required by 28 U.S.C. § 544 , providing as follows: Each .”
Citizens Sav. Bank v. Covey (In Re Pak Builders), 284 B.R. 650 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 2002). “Covey (“TRUSTEE”), alternatively seeks to avoid the mortgages pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 544 (a)(3) for failing to give constructive notice to a subsequent bona fide purchaser, for failure to form a valid mortgage contract, for the BANK’S gross negligence in executing the…”
Grand Ent. Grp., Ltd. v. Arazy, 676 F. Supp. 616 (E.D. Pa. 1987). “§ 144 , I believe that the allegations are insufficient; under the standards applicable to 28 U.S.C. § 544 , I conclude that the allegations do not rise to the level of establishing a reasonable doubt concerning this court’s impartiality.”
Art Johnston v. Hugh Earle, Collector of Internal Revenue, Walter S. Shanks, Irwin Borthick & Irving H. Curran, 245 F.2d 793 (9th Cir. 1957). “, which provides for the removal by the defendant of such a suit from a state court to a federal district court where the act complained of is claimed to have been done under the authority of the United States. Where Congress has intended to create original federal jurisdiction…”
In Re Int'l Admin. Servs., Inc., 211 B.R. 88 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1997). “28 U.S.C. § 544 . Although such claims may be litigated in the bankruptcy court, the parties also can litigate the claims in a court with concurrent jurisdiction.”
Rich v. Naviera Vacuba, S.A., 197 F. Supp. 710 (E.D. Va. 1961). “28 U.S.C. § 544 . 4 . Subject to terminal dates respecting men in armed forces.”
H. E. Bedenbaugh v. Nat'l Sur. Corp., 227 F.2d 102 (5th Cir. 1955). “28 U.S.C. § 544 provides: “(a) Each United States marshal * * * shall give a bond in the sum of $20,000 for the faithful performance of duty by himself and his deputies * * *.”
In Re: Bruce Lindsey, 148 F.3d 1100 (D.C. Cir. 1998). “3; see also 28 U.S.C. § 544 (1994). This is a solemn undertaking, a binding of the pex*son to the cause of constitutional government, an expression of the .”
United States v. Robert Grant & Fid. & Deposit Co. of Maryland, 237 F.2d 511 (7th Cir. 1956). “n of the attorney general of the United States; on May 1, 1950, Grant, as principal, and the other defendant herein, as surety, gave bond in favor of plaintiff, conditioned on,the faithful performance by the defendant Grant of all the duties of the office of United States…”
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.