United States v. Three Gambling Devices, Known as Jokers, Sub-Assembly and Essential Part of a Gambling Device

Third Circuit

United States v. Three Gambling Devices, Known as Jokers, Sub-Assembly and Essential Part of a Gambling Device

254 F.2d 395, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4027

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided April 1, 1958·No. 12448·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment for the claimant in libels filed by the United States against certain alleged Gambling Devices. The claim is that the seized devices are gambling devices under 15 U.S.C.A. § 1171. It is agreed that the machines here are identical with those discussed by the Ninth Circuit in Hanni-fin v. United States, 1957, 248 F.2d 173. The Government having lost in that litigation is evidently endeavoring to create a conflict among the circuits by trying the same process elsewhere. We do not have anything to add to what the court said in the Hannifin case and in the district court in this Circuit where Judge Marsh discussed the question very thoroughly.

The judgment of the district court, 161 F.Supp. 5, will be affirmed on the authority of the Hannifin decision and the opinion of the district judge in the court below.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment for the claimant in libels filed by the United States against certain alleged Gambling Devices. The claim is that the seized devices are gambling devices under 15 U.S.C.A. § 1171. It is agreed that the machines here are identical with those discussed by the Ninth Circuit in Hanni-fin v. United States, 1957, 248 F.2d 173. The Government having lost in that litigation is evidently endeavoring to create a conflict among the circuits by trying the same process elsewhere. We do not have anything to add to what the court said in the Hannifin case and in the district court in this Circuit where Judge Marsh discussed the question very thoroughly.

The judgment of the district court, 161 F.Supp. 5, will be affirmed on the authority of the Hannifin decision and the opinion of the district judge in the court below.

United States v. Three Gambling Devices, Known as Jokers, Sub-Assembly and Essential Part of a Gambling Device, 254 F.2d 395, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4027 (3d Cir. 1958).

Pincite

254 F.2d 395 (United States v. Three Gambling Devices, Known as Jokers, Sub-Assembly and Essential Part of a Gambling Device) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related