United States v. Four Cases Cutlery

S.D. New York

United States v. Four Cases Cutlery

25 F. Cas. 1176, 1 Hunt Mer. Mag. 166

DecidedAugust 15, 1839

StatusPublished

This text of 25 F. Cas. 1176 (United States v. Four Cases Cutlery) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Four Cases Cutlery, 25 F. Cas. 1176, 1 Hunt Mer. Mag. 166 (S.D.N.Y. 1839).

Pincite

Opinion

BETTS. District Judge

(charging jury), it is not enough for the government to show that goods are invoiced at a low rate, but they are bound to prove that the invoice is made out with the intent to defraud. It remains merely for the jury to decide: (1) Has this invoice been so made out? (2) Have the government shown this, either by proof direct or inferential? Or, (3) have the defendants shown that they were invoiced at their fair market value? It is a simple question of fact which they are to decide.

The jury retired, and made up a sealed verdict mstanter for the defendants.

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

BETTS. District Judge

(charging jury), it is not enough for the government to show that goods are invoiced at a low rate, but they are bound to prove that the invoice is made out with the intent to defraud. It remains merely for the jury to decide: (1) Has this invoice been so made out? (2) Have the government shown this, either by proof direct or inferential? Or, (3) have the defendants shown that they were invoiced at their fair market value? It is a simple question of fact which they are to decide.

The jury retired, and made up a sealed verdict mstanter for the defendants.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 F. Cas. 1176, 1 Hunt Mer. Mag. 166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-four-cases-cutlery-nysd-1839.