U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Separate Plea in Abatement of Defendant, A. L. McCormack

Separate plea in abatement of defendant, A. L. McCormack for Criminal Case No. 14912: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, attorneys for McCormack ask the court to remove said defendant from the indictment based upon the evidence provided within.

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Separate Plea in Abatement of Defendant, A. L. McCormack

Separate plea in abatement of defendant, A. L. McCormack for Criminal Case No. 14912: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, attorneys for McCormack ask the court to remove said defendant from the indictment based upon the evidence provided within.

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Recognizances for Appearance

Two recognizances for appearance in court for Criminal Case No. 14937: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In these two documents, Thomas J. Pendergast and Robert Emmet O'Malley assert that he will appear before court to answer for charges of "interferring with the orderly and lawful functioning of the Judiciary Department."

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Recognizances for Appearance

Two Recognizances for appearance in court for Criminal Case No. 14912: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In these documents, Thomas J. Pendergast and Robert Emmet O'Malley assert that he will appear before court to answer for charges of "corruptly obstructing the due administration of justice in the case of the American Insurance Company vs. the Superintendent of Insurance of the State of Missouri."

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Plea in Bar, Plea in Abatement, and Motion to Quash the Indictment, et al.

Plea in bar to the indictment, plea in abatement of the indictment, and motion to quash the indictment, and to dismiss the prosecution, on behalf of defendant T. J. Pendergast in Criminal Case No. 14912: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, attorneys for Pendergast request the above actions be taken for seven reasons as outlined within.

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Plea in Bar of Defendant, T. J. Pendergast

Plea in bar of defendant, T. J. Pendergast for Criminal Case No. 14912: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, attorneys for Pendergast state that all alleged overt acts included in the indictment occurred more than three years before the return of the indictment. Thus, Pendergast requests "that prosecution under said indictment be barred and that he be, therefore, discharged."

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Plea in Abatement, Plea in Bar, and Motion to Dismiss

Plea in abatement, plea in bar, and motion to dismiss in Criminal Case No. 14912: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, attorneys for Pendergast request the above actions be taken for two reasons as outlined within.

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Order upon Plea of Not Guilty

Order upon plea of not guilty Criminal Case No. 14937: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, the court acknowledges Pendergast's oral plea of not guilty and orders that any :any demurrer to the indictment or motion to quash or other preliminary motion shall be filed" by September 6, 1640.

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Order Transferring Case

Order transferring case for Criminal Case No. 14937: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, Albert L. Reeves transfers Case No. 14912 to No. 14937 as both cases have the same defendants and allegations.

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Motion to Stay Proceedings

Motion to stay proceedings herein and to continue this case as to the defendant, T. J. Pendergast, for the purpose of permitting this defendant to apply for executive clemency in Criminal Case No. 14937: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, attorneys for Pendergast request the court to delay the case so that the defendant can apply for a pardon on account of his previous penitentiary sentence and payment of fine.

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Motion to Stay Proceedings

Motion to stay proceedings herein and to continue this case as to the defendant, T. J. Pendergast, for the purpose of permitting this defendant to apply for executive clemency in Criminal Case No. 14912: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, attorneys for Pendergast request the court to delay the case so that the defendant can apply for a pardon on account of his previous penitentiary sentence and payment of fine.

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Motion to Quash Petit Jury Panel

Two separate motions of defendants T. J. Pendergast and R. E. O'Malley to quash petit jury panel for Criminal Case No. 14937: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In these documents, attorneys for the two defendants motion to reject the selected jury because of an order that excluded Jackson County residents from being selected. The defendant attorneys' seven reasons to quash said jury are included within.