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/250/207/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/250/207/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
United States v. Ferger , 250 U.S. 207 (1919)
United States v. Ferger (No. 2)
No. 777
Argued April 29, 1919
Decided June 2, 1919
250 U.S. 207
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
Syllabus
Congress has power, under the commerce clause, to forbid and punish a conspiracy to forge and utter bills of lading for fictitious interstate shipments. United States v. Ferger, ante, 250 U. S. 199.
256 F.3d 8 reversed.
The case is stated in the opinion.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case is disposed of by the ruling just announced in No. 776, ante, 250 U. S. 199. The indictment here was for conspiring to do the various acts charged in the previous case -- that is, the fraudulent fabrication and uttering of the same fictitious bills of lading and the obtaining of money thereon by delivering the same to the Second National Bank of Cincinnati as collateral. The demurrer which was sustained
by the court below in the previous case was also sustained as to this.
While there is a separate writ of error and a separate record in this case, it is conceded by all parties that the cases are in legal principle the same and that the decision of one concludes the other. It follows, therefore, that, for the reasons stated in the previous case No. 776, the judgment in this must be and it is reversed, and the case remanded for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.
And it is so ordered.
MR. JUSTICE PITNEY dissents.
