Skip to main content
Ninth Circuit· 1/19/1949

Wright v. United States

Citations

  • 172 F.2d 310
  • 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2703

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that federal forgery statutes that do not define forgery should be given their “common, ordinary meaning,” which requires an “intent to defraud”
  • “the genuine making of a writing for the purpose of defrauding another is not forgery”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Mathews, Stephens, Driver

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Other cases with this 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.