TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.

UNITED STATES v. SOCONY-VACUUM OIL CO., Inc., Et Al.

United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 23 F. Supp. 531 (W.D. Wis. 1938)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Federal District Courts
Decided
June 2, 1938
Docket
No. 11364
Judges
Stone
Citations
23 F. Supp. 5311938 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2222

Opinion — Stone

STONE, 'District Judge.

This case is before this Court for disposition upon pleas of nolo contendere entered by some of the defendants in this action, after negotiations over a considerable period of time between the parties.

In the usual criminal case, where criminal intent is the chief element, such negotiations' may be, and perhaps on occasion have been; improper. They carfriot, in any event, conclude the Court. • - This case, however, lies in a field where the Government might, with equal propriety, have proceeded initially by a civil action in equity; or, as here, by a criminal prosecution, either being an action to enforce penalties for the. violation of a statute. The Court is of the opinion that the' wrong here' complained o'f is not malum in se, but rather malum prohibitum, one peculiarly of an' economic nature and one in which the attainment of a- proper understanding between the parties is of itself a desirable end. ' The suggested disposition of this, case upon a basis which has been discussed between the parties, subject to the approval of the Court, was presented to this Court recently. The Court, especially in the light of the facts developed in the so-called “first” case, from the discussions with counsel for the Government and the defendants, and from a study of this indictment, is familiar with what is here involved.

■Realizing the solemn responsibility of the Court, one which cannot be shared or delegated, I have come to. the conclusion that the disposition of this case, as recommended by the Government, is, under all the circumstances, fair and in the public interest, and one which this Court should and therefore does approve.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1939: 11952: 119392026peak 1939 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Twin Ports Oil Co. v. Pure Oil Co.26 F. Supp. 366 (D. Minnesota 1939)
  2. Schwarz v. General Aniline & Film Corp.279 A.D. 996 (1952) · Dissent

Most recent

  1. Schwarz v. General Aniline & Film Corp.279 A.D. 996 (1952) · Dissent
  2. Twin Ports Oil Co. v. Pure Oil Co.26 F. Supp. 366 (D. Minnesota 1939)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list