Citation network
Hubbard Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 15, 1995
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
- Relied / Followed
-
Hubbard v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 514 U.S. 695 (1995) October Term, 1994 Syllabus Hubbard V. UnitedSearch
-
He was convicted after the District Court, relying on United States v. BramblettSearch
-
of prosecutors and Congress. Pp. 711-715. JUSTICE SCALIA, joined by JUSTICE KENNEDY, agreed that United States v. BramblettSearch
-
Relying on our decision in United States v. BramblettSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
exception. First suggested over 30 years ago in Morgan v. UnitedSearch
-
e. g., Mississippi v. JohnsonSearch
-
United States v. MasterpolSearch
-
United States v. AbrahamsSearch
-
United States v. WoodSearch
-
Although the Seventh and District of Columbia Circuits have questioned the basis of the exception, see United States v. BarberSearch
-
United States v. PoindexterSearch
-
that Congress intended the word to be used in the unusual sense employed in Mississippi v. JohnsonSearch
-
Webster's New International Dictionary 2324 (2d ed. 1949). Cf. Rowland v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Monell v. NewSearch
-
McBoyle v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 283 U. S. 25 , 27 (1931). See also United States v. BatchelderSearch
-
Lanzetta v. NewSearch
-
BFP v. ResolutionSearch
-
was intended to procure Government compensation. See Supplemental Memorandum for the United States in United States v. BramblettSearch
-
Court refused, however, to rest its decision on that more narrow interpretation. Ibid. 6 See, e. g., Thompson v. ThompsonSearch
-
to prohibit false statements made to defraud Government corporations, which flourished during World War I. Cf. Lebron v. NationalSearch
-
It was limited to false statements intended to bilk the Government out of money or property. See United States v. CohnSearch
-
see also United States v. YermianSearch
-
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit only seven years after Bramblett was decided. In Morgan v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. ErhardtSearch
-
Morgan v. UnitedSearch
-
in a slightly different manner. In United States v. D'AmatoSearch
-
Id., at 28. Accord, United States v. LondonSearch
-
the judicial function exception evidence a good deal of respectful skepticism about the correctness of that decision. v. WithSearch
-
Patterson v. McLeanSearch
-
The Federalist No. 78, p. 490 (H. Lodge ed. 1888) (A. Hamilton)). See also Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. CaseySearch
-
USee also, e. g., Patterson v. McLeanSearch
-
Square D Co. v. NiagaraSearch
-
Burnet v. CoronadoSearch
-
validity of that decision is not fairly included in the question on which we granted certiorari. See generally Lebron v. NationalSearch
-
Hilton v. SouthSearch
-
often does, enact separate criminal statutes that may, in practice, cover some of the same conduct. See United States v. BatchelderSearch
-
I concur in the judgment of the Court, and join Parts I-III and VI of JUSTICE STEVENS' opinion. United States v. BramblettSearch
-
ante, at 713 (quoting Patterson v. McLeanSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial