United States v. Yorsaner, 37040.
Decision Date | 30 September 1937 |
Docket Number | No. 37040.,37040. |
Citation | 20 F. Supp. 902 |
Parties | UNITED STATES v. YORSANER. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
Leo J. Hickey, U. S. Atty., of Brooklyn, N. Y. (Albert Lyons, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel), for the United States.
Sweet & Sweet, of New York City, for defendant.
The defendant moves to dismiss the indictment containing two counts, which charges the violation of title 18, United States Code, § 338 (18 U.S.C.A. § 338).
The first count charges that the defendant devised a scheme to defraud his prospective creditors and to obtain property and credit from them by means of false representations whereby the scheme of the defendant would obtain property and credit from his creditors by submitting to them a false financial statement showing his net worth to be about $2,000 more than defendant knew it was; that, having devised the scheme, the defendant deposited the following statement in the mail:
"Watkins Iron & Pipe Statement Bank Balance, About $600 Accounts Receivable $1300 Accounts Payable $600 Asset Value of Lot $4000 Mortgage on Lot $2500 "A. Yorsaner "Watkins Iron & Pipe."
The second count is in the same language as the first count. It deals with another statement sent through the mail, as follows:
"Brooklyn, N. Y., May 15, 1934 "American Petrometal Corp "Watkins Iron & Pipe "Dealers in Second Hand and New Iron and Pipe Terms 196 Watkins Street Warehouse stock (New) 50 Ton Warehouse stock (Old) 70 Ton Accounts Payable $600 Accounts Receivable $1300 Asset Value of lot $4000 Mortgage $2500 Bank Balance $678.29 "A. Yorsaner."
The defendant claims that the indictment is insufficient for the following reasons:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Epstein
...F.2d 9; Scheinberg v. United States, 2 Cir., 1914, 213 F. 757; Bettman v. United States, 6 Cir., 1915, 224 F. 819; United States v. Yorsaner, D.C.,E.D.N.Y.1937, 20 F.Supp. 902. Under these circumstances, the motion for judgment of acquittal must be II. Motion For New Trial Since the foregoi......