United States v. Brandom
Decision Date | 03 August 1970 |
Docket Number | Crim. A. No. 23031-3. |
Citation | 320 F. Supp. 520 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Smith F. BRANDOM, Jr., Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Anthony P. Nugent, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Kansas City, Mo., for plaintiff.
Robert G. Duncan, of Pierce & Duncan, Kansas City, Mo., for defendant.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S "MOTION TO DISMISS AND TO QUASH INDICTMENT"
In Count one of the indictment returned herein on January 29, 1970, defendant is charged with a "scheme and artifice" during the period April 18, 1962, to and including November 4, 1965, "in the Western District of Missouri and elsewhere" to obtain money and property from the Midwest Mutual Casualty Company and its management company, Gibraltar Management Corporation, and the former's policyholders and claimants and others "by means of false and fraudulent pretenses, representations and promises." It is alleged that the "scheme and artifice" were carried out chiefly by devising to set up a management company, "ostensibly to operate the insurance company, but in reality as a means to withdraw large sums of money from the insurance company, and as a means to keep pertinent information as to the financial condition of the insurance company from examiners of the Division of Insurance" by carrying out certain acts enumerated in the indictment, including the delivery to the Missouri Division of Insurance by the mails on September 22, 1965, of a false financial statement of the insurance company for the quarter ending June 30, 1965, in violation of § 1341, Title 18, United States Code. Count two charges similar delivery by mail on or about May 25, 1965, of a false financial statement for the quarter ending March 31, 1965; Count three the similar delivery on or about March 2, 1965, of a false financial statement for the quarter ending December 31, 1964; Count four the similar delivery on or about September 3, 1965, of a letter of a "lulling nature relative to submission of financial statements * * * designed to mislead the Division of Insurance into believing that the insurance company's managers were attempting to comply with the requirements of the law and the directives of the Division of Insurance"; Count five, the delivery of a similar letter on or about June 28, 1965, "relative to the submission of the Schedule P portion of the 1964 annual statement of the insurance company"; Count six, the delivery of a letter on or about June 28, 1965, from the Missouri Superintendent of Insurance to the insurance company president, which letter "outlined the policies of that office relative to the insurance company's disregarding of instructions from the Division of Insurance and of certain other practices of the insurance company which were unacceptable to the Division of Insurance"; Count seven, the similar delivery of a letter on or about June 22, 1965, from the Chief Examiner of the State Division of Insurance to the president of the insurance company, "which letter related the failure of Midwest Mutual Casualty Company to complete a portion of the 1964 annual statement"; Count eight, the delivery of a letter on or about June 18, 1965, from George T. O'Laughlin to the Missouri Superintendent of Insurance, "which letter related to the failure of Midwest Mutual Casualty Company to pay claims promptly"; Count nine, a letter from James P. Dalton, counsel of the Division of Insurance, to George T. O'Laughlin on or about June 25, 1965, "regarding the prompt settlement of claims"; Count ten, the delivery of O'Laughlin's letter on or about July 17, 1965, to Dalton, "which letter contained a complaint against Midwest Mutual Casualty Company"; Count eleven, the delivery on or about February 1, 1965, to the Chase Insurance Agency, Inc., 9567 Page Boulevard, St. Louis, Missouri, a letter from the Chief Examiner of the Missouri Division of Insurance, "which letter conveyed information based on a false financial statement dated September 30, 1964, furnished to the Division of Insurance by Midwest Mutual Casualty Company"; and Count twelve charges some 30 overt acts carried out by defendant and his coconspirators in advancing the aforementioned scheme and artifice.
Defendant has now filed his "motion to dismiss and to quash indictment," asserting the following grounds:
Defendant's first contention that the indictment is at once duplicitous and multiplicitous is without merit. Section 1341 of Title 18, United States Code, provides as follows:
"Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Schall
...134, 348 F.2d 363 (1965) (65 Count Indictment); Milam v. United States, 322 F.2d 104, 109-110 (5th Cir. 1963); United States v. Brandom, 320 F.Supp. 520 (D.C.Mo.1970) (12 Count Indictment); United States v. Anzelmo, 319 F.Supp. 1106 (E.D.La. 1970) (16 Count Indictment); United States v. Mah......
-
People v. Hale
...multiplicitous counts to the jury, (see People v. Horne, 121 Misc.2d 389, 394, 468 N.Y.S.2d 433 [Kings Co.1983] citing U.S. v. Brandom, 320 F.Supp. 520, 525 [W.D.Mo.1970 ]). In this capital case, it is the court's opinion that the preferred practice is to cure the defect before trial, and i......
-
United States v. Overbay
...Ketchum, C.A.2d (1963), 320 F.2d 3, 87-11, certiorari denied (1963), 375 U.S. 905, 84 S.Ct. 194, 11 L.Ed.2d 145; United States v. Brandom, D.C.Mo. (1970), 320 F.Supp. 520, 5253; United States v. Saporta, D.C.N.Y. (1967), 270 F.Supp. 183, 1875. In this connection, Mr. Justice Frankfurter sta......
-
Blyden v. Hogan
... ... No. 70 Civ. 4878 ... United States District Court, S. D. New York ... November 30, 1970.320 F. Supp. 514 Paul ... ...