Evan Callanan, Sr. (87-2034), Evan Callanan, Jr. (87-2036) v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• differentiating the retroactivity analysis in Allen v. Hardy, 478 U.S. 255 (1986
• “Although the lower federal courts had interpreted the words ‘scheme or artifice to defraud’ as broad enough to include schemes to defraud the public of ‘intangible rights’ ... McNally read the statute as ‘limited in scope to the protection of property rights.’ ”
• \Although the lower federal courts had interpreted the words 'scheme or artifice to defraud' as broad enough to include schemes to defraud the public of 'intangible rights' ... McNally read the statute as 'limited in scope to the protection of property rights.' \

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).