Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Robert CRYSTAL, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee, 1932 — 59 F.2d 1057 · caselaw · US
General
Robert CRYSTAL, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee
59 F.2d 1057·United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·1932
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Robert CRYSTAL, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Appellee.
No. 4834.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
June 24, 1932.
Max V. Schoonmaker and Ralph P. Tannehill, both of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant.
Louis E. Graham, U. S. Atty., and James H. Dilley, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Pittsburgh, Pa.
.Before BUFFINGTON, WOOLLEY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PEE CUEIAM.]
PEE CUEIAM.
The only question in this case is whether the evidence was such that the trial judge properly refused to give binding instructions in favor of the defendant. The proofs have been carefully considered by each member of this court and discussed jointly, with the result that this court is satisfied no error was committed. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.