Citation network
Dixson Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 22, 1984
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Dixson v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 465 U.S. 482 (1984) U.S. Supreme Court Dixson v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 465 U.S. 482 (1984) Dixson v. UnitedSearch
-
a broad jurisdictional reach (particularly the Second Circuit's Page 465 U. S. 483 decision in United States v. LevineSearch
-
United States v. LoschiavoSearch
-
United States v. DelSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
would compel us to construe the statute in favor of petitioners, as criminal defendants in these cases. See Rewis v. UnitedSearch
-
to the instant case is the House Judiciary Committee's citation of the Second Circuit's decision in United States v. LevineSearch
-
supported by the majority of recent decisions in the Federal District Courts and Courts of Appeals. In United States v. HollingsheadSearch
-
for or on behalf of the Federal Government in administering expenditure of federal funds. Similarly, in United States v. KirbySearch
-
a). United States v. GallegosSearch
-
duties in processing grant applications directly influenced the expenditure of federal funds. See also United States v. MosleySearch
-
Harlow v. UnitedSearch
-
F.Supp. 1222 (SD Ind.1975), affirmance order sub nom. United States v. MetroSearch
-
Management Corp., 541 F.2d 284 (CA7 1976). But see United States v. LoschiavoSearch
-
United States v. HoskinsSearch
-
for carrying out a federal program or policy. Our opinion today is, therefore, fully consistent with Krichman v. UnitedSearch
-
Together with No. 82-5331, Hinton v. UnitedSearch
-
One telling amendment came in 1948, largely as a result of this Court's decision in United States v. StrangSearch
-
United States v. BirdsallSearch
-
United States v. LevineSearch
-
F.2d 745 (CA2 1942). But cf. United States v. StrangSearch
-
control over daily operations and federal retention of oversight of its funds in another context. In United States v. OrleansSearch
-
United States v. MooreSearch
-
U. S. 122 , 423 U. S. 145 (1975), quoting United States v. BrownSearch
-
Rewis v. UnitedSearch
-
the Court notes, ante at 465 U. S. 494 -495, that the House Judiciary Committee cited United States v. LevineSearch
-
language and legislative history. The only case from this Court that interpreted the language at issue is Krichman v. UnitedSearch
-
The lower court cases relied on by the Court that involve grant-in-aid programs are in conflict. Compare United States v. LoschiavoSearch
-
F.Supp. 410 (ND Ill.1981), with United States v. MosleySearch
-
quite distinguishable from that of employees of federal grant recipients or their subgrantees. United States v. HollingsheadSearch
-
Id. at 754. United States v. KirbySearch
-
involved persons acting under federal licenses as grain inspectors for the Federal Government. United States v. GallegosSearch
-
Id. at 1113. Harlow v. UnitedSearch
-
involved an employee of a federal instrumentality operating on United States military bases. United States v. GriffinSearch
-
or its predecessors until the early 1970's. The Second Circuit's 1975 case, United States v. DelSearch
-
administering federal grant funds is exceedingly unlikely to be a recent phenomenon, cf. United States ex rel. Marcus v. HessSearch
-
principle means that the grantee's activities are typically not attributable to the United States, see United States v. OrleansSearch
-
inspectors had not been state employees, it would have been perfectly apparent -- on the authority of United States v. LevineSearch
-
F.2d 745 (CA2 1942), for example -- that they were acting on behalf of the United States. See United States v. KirbySearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Dixson v. UnitedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial