Supreme Court· 2/24/1931
Prussian v. United States
Citations
- 282 U.S. 675
- 51 S. Ct. 223
- 75 L. Ed. 610
- 1931 U.S. LEXIS 35
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- clause \other writing\ was intended to \extend[ ] the penal provisions of the statute to all writings of every class if forged for the purpose of obtaining money from an officer of the United States\
- interpretation including endorsement “would be possible only by a strained construction of the language” — “if the point were doubtful, the doubt would be resolved by a consideration of the purpose and history of the Act”
- in which the Supreme Court held that a forged endorsement of the payee’s name on a genuine government draft is not a forgery of an “obligation of the United States,” the endorsement being at most the purported obligation of the endorser and not an obligation of the United States
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Stone
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
87 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. C. M. Joiner Leasing Corp.Supreme Court· 1943-11-22· cited 680×
- United States v. Joseph CalabroSecond Circuit· 1972-09-21· cited 215×
- Watson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama· 1980-10-28· cited 153×
- United States v. Clyde Eugene Garner, United States of America v. Lorene Brown, United States of America v. Dennis Dwayne GarnerSixth Circuit· 1976-03-19· cited 99×
- John Edward Merrill v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1964-11-24· cited 60×
- United States v. Rolf Wilhelm Otto AntonSeventh Circuit· 1982-05-03· cited 56×
- Daniel Jackson Oliver Wendel Holmes Morgan v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1962-10-16· cited 55×
- People v. HamlinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1977-06-20· cited 49×
- Fannie Mae Ross v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1967-03-22· cited 46×
- United States v. Ralph E. Smith, D/B/A Televideo CorporationFifth Circuit· 1982-09-02· cited 40×
- United States v. George Lorenzo CollinsNinth Circuit· 1972-07-26· cited 39×
- United States v. VerdiUnited States Court of Military Appeals· 1978-09-05· cited 38×
- United States v. Tami M. LecoeNinth Circuit· 1991-06-06· cited 35×
- Clarence D. Rogers v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1962-08-08· cited 34×
- United States v. HallW.D. Oklahoma· 1975-08-25· cited 33×
- Howard Wallace Barbee and Bobby Joe Manziel v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1968-05-27· cited 30×
- United States v. Raymond W. Zwego, Jr.Tenth Circuit· 1981-09-22· cited 29×
- United States v. Wayne B. ClizerNinth Circuit· 1972-08-31· cited 28×
- United States v. Philip Albanese and Rosario Albanese, Philip AlbaneseSecond Circuit· 1955-06-02· cited 27×
- James A. Edwards v. United StatesSeventh Circuit· 1987-03-23· cited 27×
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Williams v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1897-11-29· cited 255×
- Dunbar v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1895-01-28· cited 224×
- Fasulo v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1926-12-06· cited 104×
- United States v. TurnerSupreme Court· 1833-03-12· cited 25×
- United States v. JollyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Tennessee· 1888-11-15· cited 19×
- United States v. DavisSupreme Court· 1913-12-01· cited 15×
- Hamil v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1924-04-30· cited 10×
- De Lemos v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1899-01-03· cited 9×
- United States v. AlbertUnited States Circuit Court for the Northern District of Florida· 1891-02-17· cited 4×
Other cases named Prussian v. United States
1 other CourtListener record shares 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.