U.S. v. ASHMAN

Nos. 91-2390, 91-2406, 91-2462, 91-2488, 91-2524, 91-2590, 91-2676, 91-2677, 91-2708, 91-2709.

964 F.2d 596 (1992)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bradley S. ASHMAN, John Ryan, Joel J. Fetchenhier, Thomas P. Kenney, William A. Barcall, III, Sheldon Schneider, Edward A. Cox, III, John A. Vercillo, Martin J. Dempsey, Charles W. Bergstrom, Defendants-Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Decided April 29, 1992.

Opinion May 8, 1992.

Order June 18, 1992.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Barry R. Elden, Asst. U.S. Atty., Office of the U.S. Atty., Criminal Receiving, Appellate Div., Chicago, Ill., for U.S.

Michael D. Monico, Barry A. Spevack, Monico, Pavich & Spevack, Chicago, Ill., for John A. Vercillo.

Garrett B. Johnson, Mark D. Young, Kirkland & Ellis, Scott E. Early, Chicago, Ill., Robert H. Bork, Washington, D.C., Ann E. Barlow, New York City, for Board of Trade of the City of Chicago, amicus curiae.

James R. Epstein, Jerry A. Esrig, Chicago, Ill., for Martin J. Dempsey.

Nathan Z. Dershowitz, Amy Adelson, Dershowitz & Eiger, New York City, Alan M. Dershowitz, Cambridge, Mass., for Bradley S. Ashman.

Margaret L. Paris, Robert M. Stephenson, Cotsirilos, Stephenson, Tighe & Streicker, Chicago, Ill., for Joel J. Fetchenhier.

Gordon B. Nash, Jr., Gardner, Carton & Douglas, James R. Streicker, Cotsirilos, Stephenson, Tighe & Streicker, Patrick S. Coffey, Federal Public Defender, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Chicago, Ill., for John C. Ryan.

Nicholas F. Maniscalco, Chicago, Ill., for William A. Barcal, III.

Margaret L. Paris, Robert M. Stephenson, Cotsirilos, Stephenson, Tighe & Streicker, Chicago, Ill., for Thomas P. Kenney and Sheldon Schneider.

Nan R. Nolan, Robinson, Curley & Clayton, Donald C. Shine, Michael J. Daley, Nisen & Elliott, Chicago, Ill., for Charles W. Bergstrom.

Matthias A. Lydon, Jayne Carr Thompson, Lydon & Griffin, Chicago, Ill., for Edward A. Cox, III.

Before CUDAHY, POSNER, and EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judges.


PER CURIAM.

We have before us a motion by the government to file a 280-page appellee's brief; the normal limit is of course 50 pages but the government points out that the appellants, ten criminal defendants tried together for commodities fraud, filed 438 pages of opening briefs (458 when the amicus brief, which supports the defendants, is included in the count). If the government's motion were granted, we would be required to read 738 pages of briefs in this matter...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases