49 U.S.C. § 80116

Criminal penalty

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 49 CasesGoogle Scholar
A person shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, if the person—(1) violates this chapter with intent to defraud; or(2) knowingly or with intent to defraud—(A) falsely makes, alters, or copies a bill of lading subject to this chapter;(B) utters, publishes, or issues a falsely made, altered, or copied bill subject to this chapter; or(C) negotiates or transfers for value a bill containing a false statement.(Pub. L. 103–272, § 1(e), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1353.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised

Section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

80116

49 App.:121.

Aug. 29, 1916, ch. 415, § 41, 39 Stat. 544.

In this section, before clause (1), the words “fined under title 18” are substituted for “a fine not exceeding $5,000”, and the words “shall be guilty of a misdemeanor” are omitted, for consistency with title 18. The words “upon conviction . . . punished for each offense” are omitted as unnecessary because of the restatement. Clause (1) is substituted for “or who, with intent to defraud, violates, or fails to comply with, or aids in any violation of, or failure to comply with any provision of this chapter” for clarity and because of 18:2. In clause (2)(A), the words “forges, counterfeits” are omitted as being included in “makes”. The word “copies” is substituted for “prints or photographs” for clarity. The words “bill of lading subject to this chapter” are substituted for “bill of lading purporting to represent goods received for shipment among the several States or with foreign nations” for clarity and for consistency with section 80102 of the revised title. Clause (2)(B) is substituted for “utters or publishes as true and genuine any such falsely altered, forged, counterfeited, falsely printed or photographed bill of lading . . . or issues” to eliminate unnecessary words and for consistency in this section. The words “knowing it to be falsely altered, forged, counterfeited, falsely printed or photographed” are omitted as unnecessary because of the restatement of the intent required to commit the crime. The words “or aids in making, altering, forging, counterfeiting, printing or photographing, or uttering or publishing the same . . . or aids in issuing or procuring the issue of” are omitted as surplus because of 18:2. The words “as to the receipt of the goods, or as to any other matter” are omitted as unnecessary.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1999–2007 · leading case: United States v. Yair Malol, 476 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir. 2007).
United States v. Yair Malol, 476 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir. 2007). “§§ 1951-52 , eight counts of making a false bill of lading under 49 U.S.C. § 80116 , and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering under 18 U.”
United States v. Miller, 188 F.3d 1312 (11th Cir. 1999). “This provision was amended July 5, 1994, and is now codified at 49 U.S.C. § 80116 (1994). 5 . The jury was unable to reach a verdict as to the conspiracy count and three counts of making false statements to a bank.”
Coast to Coast Seafood, Inc. v. Assurances Generales de France, 50 P.3d 662 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “In fact, when revising the Pomerene Act, Congress eliminated the applicability of criminal penalties in 49 U.S.C. § 80116 for fraudulent bills of lading issued in foreign ports.”
United States v. Rafi Rafael, 163 F. App'x 761 (11th Cir. 2005). “§ 371 , and Count Thirty for making a false bill of lading, in violation of 49 U.S.C. § 80116 . Rafael pled guilty to both counts.”
United States v. Moran Shepkaru, 191 F. App'x 893 (11th Cir. 2006). “§§ 1951 and 2; (4) making a false bill of lading, in violation of 49 U.S.C. § 80116 and 18 U.S.C. § 2 ; and (5) conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Miller, 188 F.3d 1312 (11th Cir. 1999). “§ 121 (1994);4 (c) execute a scheme to defraud and 4 This provision was amended July 5, 1994, and is now codified at 49 U.S.C. § 80116 (1994). 5 obtain monies from a federally insured financial institution in violation of 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.