United States v. John Andrew Sturm

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a debtor committed extortion by withholding a plane’s logbooks when the lender repossessed the plane
• holding that “for purposes of the Hobbs Act, the use of legitimate economic threats to obtain property is wrongful only if the defendant has no claim of right to that property” (footnotes omitted)
• rejecting \purely objective\ definitions which contained \no reference to the defendant's state of mind\
• rejecting “purely objective” definitions which contained “no reference to the defendant’s state of mind”
• suggesting, hypothetically, that a threat of litigation could constitute extortion under the Hobbs Act upon proof that the person making the threat knew he was not entitled to the damages he was threatening to sue for
• “It would be unjust to convict A of extortion unless she knew she had no claim to the property that she allegedly sought to extort.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).