Jansen v. United States
Jansen v. United States, 414 U.S. 826 (1973)
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 8 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(noting that the Government has standing to sue when a pattern or practice exists)
-
(policy of leniency following guilty plea properly held by the trial court to be inapplicable to situation where defendant puts government to its proof in full trial)
-
(“The District Court correctly exercised its discretion to issue an injunction properly tailored so as to keep interference with [defendant real estate broker’s] business at a minimum compatible with full compliance with the law.”)
-
(“ ‘[The words “for profit”] ... were evidently included in § 3604(e)
-
(court could not find that publicity prejudiced jury where district court asked jurors whether any of them had seen the article and there was no evidence that more than one juror had read it; court will not assume each juror purposely lied)
Cited by 70 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- R.J.R. Services, Inc., Individually, and D/B/A Ron Russell and Associates, and Ronald J. Russell v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Company
- Michigan Protection & Advocacy Service, Inc. v. Babin
- Borough of Collingswood v. Ringgold
- United States v. Theodore J. Isaacs and Otto Kerner, Jr.
- In re Books, Inc.
- Bernard Beam v. Ipco Corporation, D/B/A Sterling Optical
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.