Citation network
Parr Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 13, 1960
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
-
Parr v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 363 U.S. 370 (1960) U.S. Supreme Court Parr v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 363 U.S. 370 (1960) Parr v. UnitedSearch
-
and their determinations, made within the prescribed limit as here, are not judicially reviewable, Madeley v. TrusteesSearch
-
Badders v. UnitedSearch
-
Durland v. UnitedSearch
-
Kann v. UnitedSearch
-
or, as we said in Pereira v. UnitedSearch
-
Pereira v. UnitedSearch
-
check mailed to the oil company at Houston, in payment of the latter invoice. We think these counts are ruled by Kann v. UnitedSearch
-
Madeley v. TrusteesSearch
-
Kluckman v. TrusteesSearch
-
Bradford v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Shushan v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 117 F.2d 110, 115 (C.A. 5th Cir.). See also Steiner v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. EarnhardtSearch
-
Holmes v. UnitedSearch
-
Mitchell v. UnitedSearch
-
Stephens v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 41 F.2d 440 (C.A. 9th Cir.). See also Ahrens v. UnitedSearch
-
involved in this case. Parr and Donald were ultimately found guilty, but their convictions were reversed. Donald v. StateSearch
-
Parr v. StateSearch
-
s funds. He was acquitted on the first indictment and convicted on the second, but his conviction was reversed. Chapa v. StateSearch
-
as a step in, but only after the consummation of, the scheme, the fraud is the exclusive concern of the States. Kann v. UnitedSearch
-
life of a scheme and the scheme is, of course, not a matter susceptible of geometric determination. In United States v. YoungSearch
-
Page 363 U. S. 398 that the scheme contemplate the use of the mails as an essential element, and in Pereira v. UnitedSearch
-
is whether the mailing was designed materially to aid the consummation of the scheme, as, for example, in Pereira v. UnitedSearch
-
s funds are taken are, as a matter of practical good sense by which law determines such issues of causation, see Gully v. FirstSearch
-
does not turn on the niceties of the common law offense of obtaining money or goods under false pretenses, see Durland v. UnitedSearch
-
the common law conception of fraud, in that financial or property loss is not an ingredient of the offense. Haas v. HenkelSearch
-
United States v. PlylerSearch
-
reimbursement for cash purchases. Page 363 U. S. 404 Second, it is urged that, under the rationale of Kann v. UnitedSearch
-
were not in execution of a scheme to defraud, because the scheme was consummated once they received the gasoline. Kann v. UnitedSearch
-
See Madeley v. TrusteesSearch
-
S.W.2d 929, 932 (Tex.Civ.App.), and Kluckman v. TrusteesSearch
-
stating that an action will lie to enjoin the collection of taxes on the ground of the Trustees' fraud, and Stephens v. DoddsSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Parr v. UnitedSearch
-
Steiner v. UnitedSearch
-
Ahrens v. UnitedSearch
-
Donald v. StateSearch
-
Chapa v. StateSearch
-
of the States. Kann v. UnitedSearch
-
In United States v. YoungSearch
-
Gully v. FirstSearch
-
of Kann v. UnitedSearch
-
(Tex.Civ.App.), and Kluckman v. TrusteesSearch
-
and Stephens v. DoddsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial