AND · 18usc1341:furtherance
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.
Exact element source
for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to doSource:
docroot/ir/usc/title18.jsonl#title18_sec1341; Unicode character offsets [507:582] (end exclusive); SHA-256 74b1f92847676f0dece4359c6b22244b8e760d8e46a597847855747fcd542511.Routes and case patterns
| Route | Definition | Merits instance blocks | Distinct merits cases | Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unclassified route provisional; 5 observed cases | no definition yet | 0 Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 5 | 0 | Used only in non-merits blocks (5). Excluded context examples:Southern Snow Manufacturing Co. v. SnoWizard Holdings, Inc. — 912 F. Supp. 2d 404 (2012) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana · 2012 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · background/merits · not counted United States v. Granberry — 725 F. Supp. 446 (1989) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri · 1989 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted Lustiger v. United States — 386 F.2d 132 (1967) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1967 — not reached · basis not recorded (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · not counted |
| after-fruition provisional; 2 observed cases | Whether a communication sent after the schemer obtained the object still furthers the scheme. | 2 Satisfied 1; not satisfied 1; excluded context 0 | 2 | United States v. Chung Lo — 231 F.3d 471 (2000) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000 — satisfied · proved (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted United States v. Hagen — 917 F.3d 668 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 — not · no-evidence (18usc1341: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted |
| essential-step provisional; provisional (1 case) | Whether the mailing was incident to an essential part of the scheme, including a routine mailing by an innocent party on which the scheme's continuation depended (Schmuck). | 2 Satisfied 2; not satisfied 0; excluded context 2 | 1 | United States v. Galloway — 664 F.2d 161 (1981) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981 — satisfied · proved (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted United States v. Galloway — 664 F.2d 161 (1981) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981 — satisfied · proved (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted United States v. Galloway — 664 F.2d 161 (1981) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981 — not · no-evidence (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/superseded · not counted United States v. Galloway — 664 F.2d 161 (1981) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981 — not · no-evidence (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/dissent · not counted |
| scheme-as-conceived provisional; provisional (1 case) | Whether the mailing was part of the execution of the scheme as the perpetrator conceived it at the time (Parr, Maze). | 3 Satisfied 1; not satisfied 2; excluded context 0 | 1 | United States v. Chung Lo — 231 F.3d 471 (2000) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000 — not · no-evidence (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted United States v. Chung Lo — 231 F.3d 471 (2000) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000 — not · no-evidence (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted United States v. Chung Lo — 231 F.3d 471 (2000) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000 — satisfied · proved (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted |
How courts decided this element
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Southern Snow Manufacturing Co. v. SnoWizard Holdings, Inc. — 912 F. Supp. 2d 404 (2012) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana · 2012 — not reached (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | not_reached Excluded from merits counts background / merits | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Granberry — 725 F. Supp. 446 (1989) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri · 1989 — not reached (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| Lustiger v. United States — 386 F.2d 132 (1967) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1967 — not reached (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / meritsNot contested; the mailings were the sales materials themselves. | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Galloway — 664 F.2d 161 (1981) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981 — not · no-evidence (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | not Excluded from merits counts applied / superseded basis: no-evidence; opinion: district court (directed verdict, reversed); subject: opinion=district court (directed verdict, reversed) The ruling under review: mailings came after the scheme reached fruition for the wholesaler and neither affected price nor concealed the rollback. Reversed by this opinion. | integral-to-essential-transaction/title-application-mailed-by-innocent-dealer-to-complete-retail-sale | The court found that the mailings alleged did nothing to further Galloway’s scheme of obtaining more money for the cars, since the transfer of title accomplished by the mailings would have occurred at whatever price the automobiles were sold.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [2672:2914] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.The court ruled, however, that the jury did not have sufficient evidence from which to find that the use of the mails was “for the purpose of executing” Galloway’s scheme to defraud.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [2485:2667] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4. |
| United States v. Galloway — 664 F.2d 161 (1981) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981 — satisfied · proved (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; theory: mailing completes the retail sale that is the final step of the scheme; opinion: majority; subject: theory=mailing completes the retail sale that is the final step of the scheme; opinion=majority Jury verdict reinstated: the evidence sufficed for the jury to find furtherance. The mailings were sent by third-party retail dealers after the wholesaler had been paid, carried no odometer reading and concealed nothing; they count because the scheme (as the jury could define it) ran through the retail sale and title transfer was needed to complete that sale. Maze distinguished (mailings there adjusted accounts among victims and raised the risk of detection); Parr "routine/legally required mailing" argument rejected in a footnote. | integral-to-essential-transaction/title-application-mailed-by-innocent-dealer-to-complete-retail-sale | In order to finalize this purchase, the Wisconsin dealer would apply for title on behalf of the retail purchaser by mailing the required documents to the State Department of Transportation.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [1458:1647] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.This essential transaction was not complete until the title documents were mailed to the responsible state agency, which then transferred title from the dealer to the retail purchaser.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [6613:6797] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.The fact that Galloway received his money before these mailings does not change our conclusion, for “a fraudulent scheme may depend on a mailing even after the defrauders have received the sought-after money or documents.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [15686:15908] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.Galloway admits this fact by emphasizing that nowhere on the title document is an odometer reading required.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [17328:17436] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.Ohrynowicz has been interpreted to hold that where a mailing was a “normal concomitant of a transaction that was essential to the fraudulent scheme, [the mailing] was made for the purpose of executing that scheme.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [5948:6162] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.Thus, Shryock stands for the proposition that where a sale to a retail customer is the final object of a scheme to defraud, mailings of title documents necessary to complete the sale are made “for the purpose of executing” the scheme.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [8888:9122] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.These mailings were thus wore than “normal concomitants” of an essential transaction, they were an integral part of that transaction. They were essential to executing the scheme to defraud.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [6798:6987] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.In this case, therefore, the mailings may fairly be said to have been for the purpose of executing the scheme to defraud.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [13556:13677] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4. |
| United States v. Galloway — 664 F.2d 161 (1981) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981 — not · no-evidence (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | not Excluded from merits counts applied / dissent basis: no-evidence; opinion: Swygert, J., dissenting; subject: opinion=Swygert, J., dissenting Dissent reads Maze, Kann and Parr/Tarnopol as controlling: Galloway had irrevocably received his money, was not a party to the retail transaction, and the mailings were routine, intrinsically innocent business mailings. | integral-to-essential-transaction/title-application-mailed-by-innocent-dealer-to-complete-retail-sale | It must be remembered that Galloway had nothing to do with the cars after he delivered them to the Auction.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [20536:20643] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.They did not affect the price paid for the car, conceal the alteration of the odometer, cause any benefits to flow to Galloway, or cause any further harm to the retail purchasers of the car.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [19779:19969] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.The transfer of the automobile titles through the post office was a routine mailing performed by Wisconsin dealers as a service to their customers.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [24872:25019] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.I agree that the mailings in this appeal are a normal concomitant of the retail sale of the car.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [19635:19731] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.Thus determining that a mailing is a normal concomitant of an essential transaction is only the beginning of the inquiry.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [19513:19634] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.I respectfully dissent because I do not believe that the mailings in this case furthered, in any way, the scheme to defraud.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [18107:18231] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4. |
| United States v. Galloway — 664 F.2d 161 (1981) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981 — satisfied · proved (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; theory: mailing sustains an ongoing scheme by keeping dealers willing to buy again; opinion: majority; subject: theory=mailing sustains an ongoing scheme by keeping dealers willing to buy again; opinion=majority Offered by the majority as "further support", not as an "even assuming" ground, so left at scope merits; the concluding holding relies on both routes together. The district court had not discussed the ongoing-scheme theory. | ongoing-scheme/successful-title-transfer-preserves-access-to-buyers | Thus, for example, evidence was introduced of odometer rollbacks on automobiles that were not subjects of the indictment, in order to demonstrate that Galloway’s scheme extended beyond individual sales.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [9549:9751] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.Any failure in the title application process would have endangered Galloway’s scheme by discouraging the retail dealer from making further purchases of his automobiles.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [10708:10876] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.Furthermore, the evidence at trial suggested that those attending the auction frequently knew and spoke with each other.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [10877:10997] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.While it is true, as the trial court noted, that failure to pass title would not necessarily have resulted in discovery of the scheme, it would have endangered its continued success.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [13278:13460] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4.Thus, the title application procedure, from Galloway’s provision of the title documents to their mailing to the state agency, was an essential step in Galloway’s scheme.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f2d_664.jsonl#/f2d/664/0161-01; Unicode character offsets [11153:11322] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f61558d6d9d4966e7953a5e92fe1d9854c9d6b5b221f27d0c6da8139133e1ae4. |
| United States v. Chung Lo — 231 F.3d 471 (2000) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000 — satisfied · proved (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; count: Counts 4, 5 and 9 (grant deed for the original sham sale; deeds of trust to the lenders); subject: count=Counts 4, 5 and 9 (grant deed for the original sham sale; deeds of trust to the lenders) Post-payoff mailings further the scheme when the scheme as conceived was not complete at funding: the sham sale had to look like a normal conveyance, and the recorder's mailings reassured the lenders (contrast Kann, Parr, Maze, where the later mailing tended to expose the fraud). | lulling/routine-post-closing-deed-mailings-in-sham-sale | These mailings occurred after the loans had been funded and after the deeds had been recorded in the Recorder’s office.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [15742:15861] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.Lo’s plan was structured to make it appear that the properties had been sold, when in fact the sales were a sham.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [20651:20764] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.The mailings could serve to “lull the victims” — in this case, the loaning banks — “into a false sense of security, postpone their ultimate complaint to the authorities, and therefore make the apprehension of the defendants less likely,” by assuring them that the conveyance of the property had gone forward in accordance with the usual procedures of the Recorder’s office and providing them with documentary proof thereof.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [20940:21363] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.The general principle upon which Lo relies is correct, for the government may not prevail without demonstrating that the mailings were incident to the execution of the scheme, rather than part of an after-the-fact transaction that, although foreseeable, was not in furtherance of the defendant’s fraudulent scheme.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [18110:18424] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.Rather, as in Sampson and Schmuck, the mailing can occur after the defendant has obtained her fee, if “the mailing is part of the execution of the scheme as conceived by the perpetrator at the time.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [19111:19310] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.From the foregoing analysis we conclude that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the convictions on Counts Four, Five and Nine, the counts alleging mailing of a grant deed attesting to one of the original sham “sales,” and of the deeds of trust.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [22097:22347] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61. |
| United States v. Chung Lo — 231 F.3d 471 (2000) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000 — not · no-evidence (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: no-evidence; count: Count 6 (MacArthur property; deed securing a later loan from a private lender); subject: count=Count 6 (MacArthur property; deed securing a later loan from a private lender) | mailing-arising-from-separate-later-loan | To this end, money from Brubaker was placed in an account in Aglibot-Bryant’s name. Brubaker was then repaid out of the escrow account before the MacArthur transaction closed. No mailings are charged with respect to that transaction.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [25248:25481] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.It appears that Brubaker subsequently made a second loan to the Bryants which he secured with a deed of rents on the MacArthur property and which led to the mailing at issue in Count Six.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [25482:25669] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.There is no basis in the evidence, however, for concluding that this second loan was part of Lo’s fraudulent scheme.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [25670:25786] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61. |
| United States v. Chung Lo — 231 F.3d 471 (2000) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000 — not · no-evidence (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: no-evidence; count: Counts 10 and 11 (79th Avenue property; deed-back mailings); subject: count=Counts 10 and 11 (79th Avenue property; deed-back mailings) Same kind of mailing as Count 7, opposite result: without evidence that a deed-back was part of the plan as conceived, the later deed mailings were not in execution of the scheme. | straw-purchaser-deed-back-without-prior-plan | Both Bosnich and Aglibot-Bryant denied knowing that their names were on the 79th Avenue property.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [24082:24179] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.Neither they nor anyone else testified to a prior plan to deed back that property.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [24180:24262] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.Nor is there any evidence that Lo ever told, or intended to tell, Bosnich or Agli-bot-Bryant that she had used their names on the 79th Avenue property loan.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [24401:24557] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.This being the state of the evidence, no reasonable juror could conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that it was part of Lo’s fraudulent plan that Bosnich or Aglibot-Bryant would deed back the 79th Avenue property.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [24558:24770] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61. |
| United States v. Chung Lo — 231 F.3d 471 (2000) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000 — satisfied · proved (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; count: Count 7 (MacArthur property; straw purchaser's deed to the owner's wife, mailed about 18 months after closing); subject: count=Count 7 (MacArthur property; straw purchaser's deed to the owner's wife, mailed about 18 months after closing) | straw-purchaser-deed-back-by-prior-understanding | He testified that he was not expected to contribute any money toward the mortgage payments and that after a year he planned to quitclaim his interest in the property back to the Bryants.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [22892:23078] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.Bosnich did not, however, quitclaim his interest in the MacArthur property a year later, but did so only after another several months, after the FBI approached him with questions about the fraudulent loan applications and informed him that his name was listed on the 79th Avenue property.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [23079:23367] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61.There is, however, sufficient evidence of a prior understanding that Bosnich would quitclaim the MacArthur deed back to the Bryants to permit the jury properly to find that the transfer of the MacArthur property to AgliboN-Bryant was part of the execution of Lo’s original plan, whether the precise timing was influenced by the FBI investigation or not.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_231.jsonl#/f3d/231/0471-01; Unicode character offsets [23598:23951] (end exclusive); SHA-256 928e2918c9b3913eacca99122eeea1b3ae403267d7e5224bd39e0afe24020b61. |
| United States v. Henry — 29 F.3d 112 (1994) · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994 — not reached (18usc1341: author: Fable · historical QA: FIX (QA2, neov2/qa/wave2-cases-QA2.md) · changed after review; current content not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | not_reached Excluded from merits counts background / merits | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Boone — 628 F.3d 927 (2010) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010 — not reached (18usc1341: author: Fable · not independently reviewed) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits claim: with 18 U.S.C. 1346 (honest services) The court recites that the neighbour-notice mailing furthered the scheme and rejects only the argument that the mailing's date limits proof of the scheme; no furtherance ruling. | Unspecified route | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| United States v. Hagen — 917 F.3d 668 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 — not · no-evidence (18usc1341: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Mailing for execution of the scheme | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: no-evidence; party: Keith Hagen; count: Counts 6 and 7, mail fraud: August 2013 letters to Kriz and Stluka offering late grazing; subject: party=Keith Hagen; count=Counts 6 and 7, mail fraud: August 2013 letters to Kriz and Stluka offering late grazing Jury conviction reversed for insufficiency. The government's lulling theory (Lane) failed because letters accepting responsibility and offering performance would not postpone complaints, and neither recipient testified to being lulled. | apology letters offering belated performance, mailed months after the victims' payments were received; lulling theory rejected | The letters underlying Counts 6 and 7 were sent in August of 2013, some four months after Hagen received payments from Kriz and Stluka for 2013 grazing and three months after the start of the grazing season.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_917.jsonl#/f3d/917/0668-01; Unicode character offsets [14550:14757] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f4086637fbe3659b9c3436280b529e9f82158bf57ed3b57d504b7c7f7ebea967.Indeed, when asked on direct exam what their responses were to this letter, Steve Stluka testified, "I just kind of laughed. ... I mean, it's too late," and Robert Kriz testified, "My honest reaction was, why do we want to take cattle down there? We've already lost $35,000 between the two of us."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_917.jsonl#/f3d/917/0668-01; Unicode character offsets [16022:16319] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f4086637fbe3659b9c3436280b529e9f82158bf57ed3b57d504b7c7f7ebea967.Under 18 U.S.C. § 1341, the alleged use of the mail must be "sufficiently closely related to," and operate to further, the defendant's scheme.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_917.jsonl#/f3d/917/0668-01; Unicode character offsets [14265:14407] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f4086637fbe3659b9c3436280b529e9f82158bf57ed3b57d504b7c7f7ebea967.Thus, the letters were not sent for the purpose of executing the alleged scheme to defraud these producers, for Hagen had already received their payments for cattle HBCC was not grazing.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_917.jsonl#/f3d/917/0668-01; Unicode character offsets [14758:14944] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f4086637fbe3659b9c3436280b529e9f82158bf57ed3b57d504b7c7f7ebea967.Mailing the letters had no effect on the success or failure of the alleged scheme; it was already completed.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_917.jsonl#/f3d/917/0668-01; Unicode character offsets [14945:15053] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f4086637fbe3659b9c3436280b529e9f82158bf57ed3b57d504b7c7f7ebea967. |
Court interpretations
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.
interpretation
Under 18 U.S.C. § 1341, the alleged use of the mail must be "sufficiently closely related to," and operate to further, the defendant's scheme.
United States v. Hagen — 917 F.3d 668 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 (18usc1341: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md))
Under 18 U.S.C. § 1341, the alleged use of the mail must be "sufficiently closely related to," and operate to further, the defendant's scheme.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_917.jsonl#/f3d/917/0668-01; Unicode character offsets [14265:14407] (end exclusive); SHA-256 f4086637fbe3659b9c3436280b529e9f82158bf57ed3b57d504b7c7f7ebea967.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.
interpretation
Mailings made to further any of these activities would satisfy the "use of the mails" element.
United States v. Gross — 370 F. Supp. 3d 1139 · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2019 (18usc1341: author: unavailable · not independently reviewed)
Mailings made to further any of these activities would satisfy the "use of the mails" element.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_370.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/370/1139-01; Unicode character offsets [20843:20937] (end exclusive); SHA-256 385b5345f2ce5f8876a0e40368f42d686f4f9abdcb52258fdd5b77eb6fd340db.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.
not-required
The mailing itself contains a false statement; an innocent mailing incident to an essential part of the scheme can suffice.
No source quotation recorded.