Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Proving fraud in a court of law is often said to be difficult as the intention to defraud is the key element in question. [4] As such, proving fraud comes with a "greater evidentiary burden than other civil claims". This difficulty is exacerbated by the fact that some jurisdictions require the victim to prove fraud by clear and convincing ...
A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the second degree when, with intent to defraud, he: makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise; or; alters, erases, obliterates, deletes, removes or destroys a true entry in the business records of an enterprise; or
Conspiracy against the United States, or conspiracy to defraud the United States, [1] is a federal offense in the United States of America under 18 U.S.C. § 371.The statute originated under a federal law enacted in 1867 that was codified in the Revised Statutes of the United States in 1874, [2] in a subsequent codification of federal penal statutes in 1909, [3] and ultimately in the United ...
Uttering is a crime involving a person with the intent to defraud that knowingly sells, publishes or passes a forged or counterfeited document. More specifically, forgery creates a falsified document and uttering is the act of knowingly passing on or using the forged document.
The standard definition of a conspiracy to defraud was provided by Lord Dilhorne in Scott v Metropolitan Police Commissioner, [1] when he said that: . it is clearly the law that an agreement by two or more by dishonesty to deprive a person of something which is his or to which he is or would be entitled and an agreement by two or more by dishonesty to injure some proprietary right of his ...
Honest services fraud is a crime defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1346 (the federal mail and wire fraud statute), added by the United States Congress in 1988. [1] The idea of this law was to criminalize not only schemes to defraud victims of money and property, but also schemes to defraud victims of intangible rights such as the "honest services" of a public official.
Count 4: Cohen’s check for $70,000 from the Donald J Trump Revocable Trust. The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and ...
A transfer will be fraudulent if made with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud any creditor. Thus, if a transfer is made with the specific intent to avoid satisfying a specific liability, then actual intent is present. However, when a debtor prefers to pay one creditor instead of another, that is not a fraudulent transfer. [citation needed]