LLOYD A. FRY ROOFING CO.

v.

VOLASCO PRODUCTS CO.

Citator

Cited By (50 total)

• United States v. Kahn, 381 F.2d 824 (7th Cir. 1967)
  …44, 127 F. 2d 336 (1942), but that allegations under the title of overt acts sup [*831] posedly may not be resorted to in order to clarify the language charging conspiracy, United States v. Knox Coal Company, 3 Cir., 347 F. 2d 33 (1965), cert, den., 382 U.S. 904, 86 S.Ct. 239, 15 L.Ed.2d 157 (1965) ; Reno v. United States, 5 Cir., 317 F. 2d 499 (1963), cert, den., 375 U.S. 828, 84 S.Ct. 72, 11 L.Ed.2d 60 (1963). We have searched for the reason for this anomaly, but have found none other than dead forms ruli…
• United States v. Addonizio, 451 F.2d 49 (3d Cir. 1971)
  …agreement to commit several crimes * * *, each one of which may be the basis for an indictment, the count charges but one offense under 18 U.S.C. § 371.” United States v. Knox Coal Co., 347 F. 2d 33, 39 (3d Cir.), cert. den. Lippi v. United States, 382 U.S. 904, 86 S.Ct. 239, 15 L. Ed.2d 157 (1965); Frohwerk v. United States, 249 U.S. 204, 39 S.Ct. 249, 63 L. Ed. 561 (1919). Appellants advance only a slightly more substantial argument as to counts III, VII and IX, which charged extor-tions from Constrad,…
• United States v. Pheaster, 544 F.2d 353 (9th Cir. 1976)
  …dictment’s specification of overt acts cannot be used to supply the allegation of a critical element completely missing from the charging language. United States v. Knox Coal Co., 347 F. 2d 33, 38 (3 Cir. 1965), cert. denied, Lippi v. United States, 382 U.S. 904, [*362] 86 S.Ct. 239, 15 L.Ed.2d 157 (1965). Nevertheless, reference to the overt acts is appropriate to confirm an otherwise commonsense interpretation of an allegation which is included in the charging language. A reading of the overt act alleged…