Goetz v. United States

8 Citing cases

  1. United States v. Moynagh

    566 F.2d 799 (1st Cir. 1977)   Cited 17 times
    Holding that defendant's failure to list equitable interest in boats that were legally owned by another company supported conviction for bankruptcy fraud

    Even if the defendant retained only an equitable interest in the boats, failure to list that interest could support the charge. See United States v. Schireson, 116 F.2d 881, 883 (3d Cir. 1940); Goetz v. United States, 59 F.2d 511, 512 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 287 U.S. 649, 53 S.Ct. 95, 77 L.Ed. 561 (1932). See also Duggins v. Heffron, 128 F.2d 546, 548 (9th Cir. 1942).

  2. United States v. Vanderberg

    358 F.2d 6 (7th Cir. 1966)   Cited 10 times
    In United States v. Vanderberg, 358 F.2d 6, 10 (7th Cir. 1966), the seventh circuit court of appeals has also suggested that the matter of concealment need not be described in the indictment.

    Reasonably construed the indictment charges concealment by failure to schedule. Cf. United States v. Young, 7 Cir., 339 F.2d 1003; United States v. Zimmerman, 7 Cir., 158 F.2d 559; Goetz v. United States, 7 Cir., 59 F.2d 511. Count I was dismissed at the close of the government's evidence when it became evident from the notary's testimony that the defendant had not been sworn upon oath.

  3. United States v. Marachowsky

    201 F.2d 5 (7th Cir. 1953)   Cited 18 times

    Various decisions have from time to time indicated that there is a legal difference between the crime of a false oath in bankruptcy proceedings and perjury. This Court, in Goetz v. U.S., 59 F.2d 511, 512, in reviewing a conviction under the earlier provision of the Bankruptcy Act, similar in all ways to the present one, said: "Appellant seeks to interpret each count of the indictment in the light of the statute and decisions relating to perjury, and they are not applicable to the instant case." Recently, Judge Kerner, speaking for the court, in U.S. v. Lynch, 7 Cir., 180 F.2d 696, said, at page 701: "But this court has held that proof of false oath in bankruptcy need not contain all of the elements of perjury.

  4. United States v. Lynch

    180 F.2d 696 (7th Cir. 1950)   Cited 10 times

    As already noted, count 12 charged defendant with knowingly and fraudulently making a false oath. Defendant makes the point that under § 152 of the Code, the proofs must contain all the elements of perjury, Willoughby v. Jamison, 8 Cir., 103 F.2d 821, and where there is no evidence from which the jury could infer that the defendant did not believe the report subscribed under oath to be true at the time the oath was made, the verdict cannot be sustained. United States v. Richards, D.C., 149 F. 443. But this court has held that proof of false oath in bankruptcy need not contain all of the elements of perjury, Goetz v. United States, 7 Cir., 59 F.2d 511, 512, and if defendant's report was knowingly false at the time he made it, the crime charged had been completed, United States v. Margolis, 3 Cir., 138 F.2d 1002. In this case defendant admits that he knew that he had subscribed the report (Government Exhibit 1-H) and that the notary public affixed her signature and seal, but he insists that he made no attempt to swear that the statements were true, and that he requested the privilege of filing a supplemental report.

  5. United States v. Zimmerman

    158 F.2d 559 (7th Cir. 1946)   Cited 5 times

    Thus it appears from this definition that concealment includes, among other things, falsification. This court in Goetz v. United States, 7 Cir., 59 F.2d 511, held that failure to schedule an equitable interest in real estate the title to which was held by another was a concealment of such property. In United States v. Schireson, 3 Cir., 116 F.2d 881, 884, 132 A.L.R. 1157, the defendant, a bankrupt, was convicted for failure to schedule personal property which was in the deposit box of his wife.

  6. Douchan v. United States

    136 F.2d 144 (6th Cir. 1943)   Cited 8 times

    Demand on the part of the trustee was not necessary, as urged, in order to establish concealment. Kalin v. United States, 5 Cir., 2 F.2d 58; Goetz v. United States, 7 Cir., 59 F.2d 511; United States v. Shapiro, 7 Cir., 101 F.2d 375. It is contended that the record does not show that appellant had actual knowledge of the appointment of the trustee [Cf. United States v. Yasser, 3 Cir., 114 F.2d 558], and that guilty knowledge is therefore not established. In the Yasser case the accused was charged with concealing property belonging to the estate of another.

  7. United States v. Momsen

    115 F.2d 635 (7th Cir. 1940)   Cited 5 times

    Havener v. United States, 10 Cir., 49 F.2d 196. A motion for arrest of judgment reaches only defects of substance. Goetz v. United States, 7 Cir., 59 F.2d 511. It has further been held that an informal and imperfect allegation of essential fact should be deemed a sufficient averment of that fact when tested by a motion for arrest of judgment. United States v. Dimmick, D.C., 112 F. 352.

  8. In re Perkins

    40 F. Supp. 114 (D.N.J. 1941)   Cited 1 times
    In Perkins, the inheritance of a son was appropriated by his father upon its receipt some eight (8) years before the filing of the son's petition.

    These facts distinguish the cases cited by the objecting creditor for the proposition that there is a continuing concealment. Huntley v. Snider, 1 Cir., 86 F.2d 539; Goetz v. United States, 7 Cir., 59 F.2d 511; In re Ulrich, D.C., 18 F. Supp. 919; In re McCann, D.C., 179 F. 575; In re Guilbert, D.C. 169 F. 149; In re Toothaker Bros., D.C. 128 F. 187. The Referee also found as a fact that there was no fund in existence subject to concealment.