Supreme Court of the United States · 2008-06-09
author: unavailable · not independently reviewed
Case and law context
Interpretation-only case: no authored CASE context or instance blocks recorded in this snapshot.
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|
Court interpretations recorded from this case
interpretation
The gravamen of the offense is the scheme to defraud, and any “mailing that is incident to an essential part of the scheme satisfies the mailing element,” Schmuck v. United States, 489 U. S. 705, 712 (1989) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), even if the mailing itself “contain[s] no false information,” id., at 715.
Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indemnity Co. — 553 U.S. 639 · Supreme Court of the United States · 2008 (18usc1341: author: unavailable · not independently reviewed)
The gravamen of the offense is the scheme to defraud, and any “mailing that is incident to an essential part of the scheme satisfies the mailing element,” Schmuck v. United States, 489 U. S. 705, 712 (1989) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted), even if the mailing itself “contain[s] no false information,” id., at 715.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/us_553.jsonl#/us/553/0639-01; Unicode character offsets [9839:10169] (end exclusive); SHA-256 b0a275de40428156e2a824aff061ac041d6abb82d46f431cd4cce736870d0c66.Evaluate the mailing against the actual scope and completion of the scheme. Bridge, 553 U.S. 639, 647 (2008), states the substantive mail-fraud nexus while deciding a civil RICO case; its separate RICO injury requirements do not become mail-fraud elements. Lulling mailings can further an ongoing scheme, but Hagen rejected incidental letters after the charged scheme was complete; Gross found collection mailings within an ongoing kickback scheme at the indictment stage.