O'Malley, R. Emmet

Displaying 13 - 24 of 110

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.

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

Motion of defendant R. E. O'Malley to quash petit jury panel 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 O'Malley 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.

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

Motion of defendant T. J. Pendergast to quash petit jury panel 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 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.

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

Motion of A. L. McCormack to quash indictment in Criminal Case No. 14912: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, McCormack's attorney requests to void the indictment because the alleged acts took place three years before the indictment was returned, thus passing the statue of limitations.

U.S. vs. T. J. Pendergast, R. E. O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack: Memorandum Upon Pleas in Abatement

Memorandum for the Honorable A. Lee Wyman, United States Judge, upon pleas in abatement interposed by the above-named defendants in Criminal Case No. 14937: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, Acting United States Attorney Richard K. Phelps summarizes the pleas of the defendants and then discusses the legality of said pleas.

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

Memorandum in plea for abatement of indictment for 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 submit a request to void the indictment for the reason outlined within.

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

Memorandum and order on the filing of affidavits of bias and prejudice for Criminal Case No. 14912: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this document, Judge Merrill E. Otis provides his response to Pendergast's affidavit that Otis has prejudice against the defendant. Otis denies any such prejudice or bias, but acknowledges a loophole that the attorneys of Pendergast used to file the affidavit on the defendant's behalf. As such, Otis is forced to order his replacement Judge Archibald K. Gardner to the case.

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

Indictment for Criminal Case No. 14937: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this indictment, the defendants are charged with the illegal appropriation of $8,000,000.00 collected from the American Insurance Company and other insurance companies. The time line of this conspiracy is then detailed in "Overt Acts".

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

Indictment for Criminal Case No. 14912: United States vs. Thomas J. Pendergast, Robert Emmet O'Malley, and A. L. McCormack, Defendant. In this indictment, the defendants are charged with the illegal appropriation of $8,000,000.00 collected from the American Insurance Company and other insurance companies. The time line of this conspiracy is then detailed in "Overt Acts".