Supreme Court· 1/28/1946

Bollenbach v. United States

Citations

326 U.S. 607
66 S. Ct. 402
90 L. Ed. 350
1946 U.S. LEXIS 2830

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

recognizing that a careful response to a jury’s request for specific pieces of evidence can keep the jury from overvaluing any one piece of evidence
noting that government there contended it was “the judge’s special business to guide the jury by appropriate legal criteria through the maze of facts before it”
reversing and remanding because a \supplemental instruction\ from the trial court following a question by the jury was \simply wrong\
reversing and remanding because a \supplemental instruction\ from the .trial court following a question by the jury was “simply wrong”
reversing and remanding because a \supplemental instruction\ from the trial court following a question by the jury was \simply wrong\
reversing and remanding because a \supplemental instruction” from the trial court following a question by the jury was \simply wrong”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Frankfurter, Black, Jackson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

661 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Bollenbach v. United States

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.