Supreme Court of the United States, 1956

Mesarosh v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided October 10, 1956 · Believing, Burton, File, Frankfurter, Government, Granted, Harlan, Motion, Reserve, Right, Should

352 U.S. 862; 1 L. Ed. 2d 72; 77 S. Ct. 8; 1956 U.S. LEXIS 387 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Solicitor General Rankin argued in support of the Government’s motion to remand. Assistant Attorney General Tompkins was with him on the motion. Frank J. Donner argued in opposition to the Government’s motion and in support of petitioners’ motion that the case be remanded to the District Court for a new trial. Arthur Kinoy, Marshall Perlin and Hubert T. Delany were with him on petitioners’ motion and a supporting memorandum.

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision.

United States v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A. (2d Cir. 2017)
Cooperman v. BOARD OF EDUC. OF HILLSIDE TP. (District Court, D. New Jersey 1983)
Cooperman v. Board of Education (District Court, D. New Jersey 1983)
Ricardo Sanders v. Vince Cullen (9th Cir. 2017)
United States v. Saena Tech Corporation (District Court, District of Columbia 2015)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

The motion of the Government to remand the case to the District Court is denied.

The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court with instructions to grant the defendants a new trial.

Mr. Justice Frankfurter, Mr. Justice Burton, and Mr. Justice Harlan dissent, believing the Government’s motion to remand should be granted, and reserve the right to file an opinion.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.