Schmidt v. United States

Sixth Circuit

Schmidt v. United States

124 F.2d 177, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 2455

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedNovember 5, 1941

DocketNo. 8959

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 124 F.2d 177 (Schmidt v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Schmidt v. United States, 124 F.2d 177, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 2455 (6th Cir. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

HICKS, Circuit Judge.

This cause was heard upon the transcript of the record, briefs, and arguments of counsel. On consideration whereof, the court is of the opinion that the filing in the Clerk’s office by appellant of the affidavits obtained under the circumstances set forth in the evidence was not upon the authority of Nye v. United States, 313 U.S. 33, 61 S.Ct. 810, 85 L.Ed. 1172, in the presence of the court or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice, since it does not appear that the court was in session at the time.

And it further appearing that to bring the acts of appellant as an attorney within the inhibition of “misbehavior of any of the officers of said courts in their official transactions” requires a construction of the statute providing for punishment by fine and imprisonment, which under well settled rules of construction of penal statutes we are not permitted to make, it is ordered and adjudged that the judgment appealed from be and is set aside, and that the rule to show cause why appellant Schmidt should not be held in contempt of court be and the same is hereby dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

HICKS, Circuit Judge.

This cause was heard upon the transcript of the record, briefs, and arguments of counsel. On consideration whereof, the court is of the opinion that the filing in the Clerk’s office by appellant of the affidavits obtained under the circumstances set forth in the evidence was not upon the authority of Nye v. United States, 313 U.S. 33, 61 S.Ct. 810, 85 L.Ed. 1172, in the presence of the court or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice, since it does not appear that the court was in session at the time.

And it further appearing that to bring the acts of appellant as an attorney within the inhibition of “misbehavior of any of the officers of said courts in their official transactions” requires a construction of the statute providing for punishment by fine and imprisonment, which under well settled rules of construction of penal statutes we are not permitted to make, it is ordered and adjudged that the judgment appealed from be and is set aside, and that the rule to show cause why appellant Schmidt should not be held in contempt of court be and the same is hereby dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 F.2d 177, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 2455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schmidt-v-united-states-ca6-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack