Reader Ad Slot
Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Supreme Court — Part 2
Page 29
29 / 112
12 Funk vs. United States.
Fed. 213); nor, as plainly appears, was the real point as it is here
involved presented in this court. The matter was disposed of as
one ‘‘hardly requiring mention.’’ Evidently the point most in
the mind of the court was the distinction relied upon, and not the
basic rule which was not contested. Both the Hendriz and Jin
Fuey Moy cases are out of harmony with the Rosen and Benson
cases and with the views which we have here expressed. In respect
of the question here under review, both are now overruled.
Judgment reversed,
Mr. Justice Carpozo concurs in the result.
Mr. Justice McReyrxoups and Mr. Justice BurLer are of opinion
that the judgment of the court below is right and should be
affirmed.
A true copy.
Test:
Clerk, Supreme Court, U. 8.
Reveal the original PDF page, then click a word to highlight the OCR text.
Community corrections
No user corrections yet.
Comments
No comments on this document yet.
Bottom Reader Ad Slot
Bottom Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Continue Exploring
Agency Collection
Explore This Archive Cluster
Broad Topic Hub
Topic Hub
letter
bureau
Related subtopics
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic