Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/222/15/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/222/15/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
United States v. Plyler, 222 U.S. 15 (1911)
United States v. Plyler
No. 440
Argued October 19, 1911
Decided October 30, 1911
222 U.S. 15
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Syllabus
It is not essential to charge or prove an actual financial or property loss to make a case of defrauding the United States.
Section 5418, Rev.Stat., prohibits the forging of written vouchers required upon examination by the Civil Service Commission of the United States and presenting such vouchers to the Commissioners.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Memorandum opinion by direction of the Court. By MR. JUSTICE HOLMES:
This is an indictment for forging vouchers required upon examination by the Civil Service Commission of the United States, certifying to the character, physical capacity, etc., of the applicant, the defendant, and for presenting the same to the Commission. The district court held that the acts were not frauds against the United States within the contemplation of Rev.Stat. § 5418, and
discharged the defendant. The government excepted, and brought the case to this Court. It now must be regarded as established that "it is not essential to charge or prove an actual financial or property loss to make a case under the statute." The section covers this case. Haas v. Henkel, 216 U. S. 462, 216 U. S. 480; Curley v. United States, 130 F. 1; United States v. Bunting, 82 F.8d 3.
Judgment reversed.
