Summary

Portrait of Stanley Forman Reed Stanley Forman Reed,  Bridges v. United States — Dissent

“ It is immaterial whether the Court of Appeals was correct in thinking that defrauding the United States in a financial sense was an essential ingredient of the False Claims Act. We think it clear that defrauding the United States is an essential ingredient of this charge of conspiracy under § 371. We do not think Marzani adds strength to the Court's position that the Suspension Act applies only to financial fraud. ”
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Stanley Forman Reed Stanley Forman Reed,  Bridges v. United States — Dissent

“ We see nothing in the legislative history of § 3287 to raise a question as to its applicability to this indictment. The opinion of the Court quotes excerpts from reports concerning the need of suspension of limitation following the First World War. A statute was then passed, which we accept as having been enacted for the same purpose and with the same coverage as the present legislation. See n. 15 of the Court's opinion. Those reports do show that war frauds of a pecuniary nature were uppermost in the minds of Congress. ”
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature