Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Bloom v. Independent Bankers Ass'n of America
429 U.S. 862
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1976-10-04
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- holding that assault as proscribed by 18 U.S.C. § 113(d) does not require intent to injure
- noting that the "magistrate was therefore correct in refusing to read into subdivision (d) the requirement of intent to do bodily harm”
- illegally seized evidence that had been suppressed in state proceeding could be used to prove the “entirely separate offense” of peijury before a federal grand jury
- state authorities illegally seized drugs and drug paraphernalia; the evidence was later used in a federal prosecution for perjury before a federal grand jury
- “[A]n agency’s interpretation of its governing statute, with the expectation that regulated parties will conform to and rely on this interpretation, is final agency action fit for judicial review.”
- one of criteria in evaluating finality is whether agency action has force of law
- ”[R]egardless of private contract law and superficial form, any facility that performs traditional bank functions of receiving or disbursing funds is a ‘branch’ of a national bank ... if (1) the facility is ... owned or rented by the national bank, and (2
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Bloom v. Independent Bankers Ass'n of America. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 61 opinions
C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.