Young v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• “The giving of a note for money received from another, if a mere incident to the carrying out of a fraudulent scheme, does not prevent the act from being an embezzlement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

• United States v. Howard W. Young
  First Circuit· 1992-01-28· cited 37×
• State v. Tauscher
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1961-04-12· cited 31×
• Hoffman v. State
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1957-05-24· cited 18×
• State v. Dixon
  Ohio Court of Appeals· 2010-09-22· cited 11×
• Pueblo v. Rosario Vega
  Supreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1958-07-31· cited 4×
• State v. Oilman
  Ohio Court of Appeals· 1936-12-15· cited 2×
• United States v. Corporation
  First Circuit· 1992-03-05
• Baugher v. State
  Ohio Court of Appeals· 1933-11-04
• State v. Miles
  Ohio Court of Appeals· 1943-12-08
• Lash v. Miller
  Ohio Probate Court· 1939-12-06
• People v. Rosario Vega
  Supreme Court of Puerto Rico· 1958-07-31

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

• United States v. Harper
  U.S. Circuit Court· 1887-10-15· cited 54×