O'CONNELL v. United States
Citations
- 253 U.S. 142
- 40 S. Ct. 444
- 64 L. Ed. 827
- 1920 U.S. LEXIS 1456
Syllabus
<p>A standing rule of a District Court extended the term for the purpose of making and filing bills of exceptions and another provided that the time allowed by the rules might be extended by order made before its expiration but that no such extension or extensions should exceed thirty days in all, without the consent of the adverse party. Held, that the court lost its power to receive and settle a bill of exceptions when the term as extended by rule had expired and when a further period of less than thirty days, allowed by order made before such expiration, had also expired; notwithstanding further attempted extensions, each ordered before expiration of its predecessor. P. 145.</p> <p>Amendment of assignments of error may be allowed on motion, in proper cases., P. 147.</p> <p>The constitutionality of the Selective Service and Espionage Acts and the criminality of conspiracies to obstruct recruiting and enlistment by persuasion were settled by decisions of this court announced since the writ of error herein was sued out. Id.</p> <p>In a trial on two counts the verdict, written apparently on a printed form, declared the defendants “guilty on the — count of the Indictment, and — on the — count of the Indictment.” No objection was made until after the case came to this court. Held, that all parties evidently understood it as a_general verdict and that the informality did not make it fatally defective or the sentence, on both counts, invalid. P. 148.</p> <p>That part of § 6 of the Selective Service Act providing “any person who shall make or be a party to the making of any false statement or certificate as to the fitness or liability of himself or any other person for service under the provisions of this Act, or regulations made by the President thereunder, or otherwise evades or aids another to evade the requirements of this Act or of said regulations,” applies to persons who are not officers or charged with the duty of carrying the act into effect. Id.</p> <p>Affirmed.
Judges: McReynolds
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
50 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Herndon v. LowrySupreme Court· 1937-04-26· cited 420×
- Singer v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1945-01-02· cited 104×
- Exporters of Manufacturers' Products, Inc. v. Butterworth-Judson Co.Supreme Court· 1922-04-10· cited 93×
- Hopper v. United StatesNinth Circuit· 1943-12-06· cited 43×
- G. W. Sheldon & Co. v. Hamburg Amerikanische Packetfahrt-Actien-GesellschaftThird Circuit· 1928-09-24· cited 36×
- Greyerbiehl v. Hughes Electric Co.Eighth Circuit· 1923-12-03· cited 24×
- Gorin v. United StatesNinth Circuit· 1940-04-22· cited 21×
- Berlin v. United StatesThird Circuit· 1926-08-26· cited 20×
- Cudahy Packing Co. v. City of OmahaEighth Circuit· 1928-01-10· cited 19×
- Minersville School Dist. v. GobitisThird Circuit· 1940-03-04· cited 16×
- Kay F. Glenn v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1969-07-23· cited 15×
- United States v. BassSeventh Circuit· 1933-04-07· cited 15×
- United States v. PayneNinth Circuit· 1934-08-31· cited 12×
- Rollins v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia· 1959-10-09· cited 11×
- Committee for Industrial Organization v. HagueD. New Jersey· 1938-10-27· cited 10×
- Texas Co. v. Brilliant Mfg. Co.Third Circuit· 1924-09-30· cited 10×
- Garfield Aniline Works, Inc. v. ZendleThird Circuit· 1930-09-19· cited 9×
- Ritz Carlton Restaurant & Hotel Co. of Atlantic City v. GillespieThird Circuit· 1924-09-30· cited 8×
- Witte v. Franklin Fire Ins. Co. of PhiladelphiaEighth Circuit· 1931-02-14· cited 8×
- H. P. Cummings Const. Co. v. Marbleloid Co.Third Circuit· 1931-08-18· cited 8×
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Schenck v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1919-03-03· cited 1,079×
- Frohwerk v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1919-03-10· cited 301×
- Waldron v. WaldronSupreme Court· 1895-03-04· cited 107×
- Ballew v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1895-12-16· cited 80×
- Goldman v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1918-01-14· cited 64×
- Davis v. PatrickSupreme Court· 1887-05-23· cited 44×
- Statler v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1895-03-25· cited 29×
- Jennings v. Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington Railway Co.Supreme Court· 1910-10-31· cited 27×
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.