48 U.S.C. § 226 to 239
Omitted
48 U.S.C. § 232 has no page of its own: the Office of the Law Revision Counsel prints it together with other sections as the single entry 48 U.S.C. § 226 to 239, shown below.
[omitted]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1951–1954 · leading case: Johnson v. United States, 206 F.2d 806 (9th Cir. 1953).
Johnson v. United States, 206 F.2d 806 (9th Cir. 1953). “However, the United States admits that the alleged facts do not state a violation, of any regulation promulgated under § 221.”
Hotch v. United States, 208 F.2d 244 (9th Cir. 1954). “s or by any means except by hand rod, spear, or gaff in any of the creeks, streams, or rivers of Alaska; or within five hundred yards of the mouth of any such creek, stream, or river [areas not in suit excepted]: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent the taking…”
United States v. Peck, 108 F. Supp. 625 (D. Alaska 1952). “466 , as amended, 48 U.S.C.A. § 232 ; and Section 102.14 of the commercial fisheries regulations for 1952, 16 F.”
United States v. Peck, 95 F. Supp. 465 (D. Alaska 1951). “2d 500, 501 , that it also applies to Section 4, 48 U.S.C.A. § 232 . It is conceded that the mouth of Peterson Creek was not marked as required by the ¡act, but it appears that in 1944 the Secretary of the Interior, acting under the power vested in him by the act of June 26,…”
United States v. Hotch, 107 F. Supp. 159 (D. Alaska 1952). “466 , commonly known as the White Act, 48 U. S.C.A. §§ 232, 234, that the regulatory power of the Secretary of the Interior shall not be exercised so as to prohibit the taking of salmon for local food requirements.”
United States v. Johnson, 107 F. Supp. 690 (D. Alaska 1952). “466 , 48 U.S.C.A. § 232 , prohibit fishing for, taking or killing any salmon within 500 yards of the mouth of any creek, stream or river.”
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.