100%(6)6 out of 6 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 3 pages.
Aida FrancoLaw, Business & SocietyProfessor Patterson9/14/18LBS Case BriefName of CaseMcBoyle v. United StatesWho started the litigation? Who is the plaintiff or government entity or agency? What do they want? The U.S. is the plaintiff. William McBoyle is the petitioner and the U.S. is the respondent. McBoyle was convicted and sentenced for violating the National Motor Vehicle Theft Act because he intentionally transported a stolen airplane from Illinois to Oklahoma, but he appealed this ruling. What legal question must the court decide, and what is the common law rule, constitutionalprovision or statute that the question will turn on?The legal question under consideration is, “Does an airplane fall under the definition of a vehicleas stated in the National Motor Vehicle Theft Act?”The answer to this question will turn on the National Motor Vehicle Theft Act.What is the court’s reasoning? (Might include reliance on precedent, statutory interpretation and legislative history & societal considerations) If there’s a dissent, what are the main points of disagreement?The court looked at the Tariff Act of 1930 and analyzed the wording of the definition for “motor vehicle” as described in the National Motor Vehicle Theft Act. The court mentions that in the Tariff Act of 1930, it states that a vehicle is a thing that moves on land, which clearly excludes airplanes. The court notes that in The National Motor Vehicle Theft Act motor vehicle is defined as an “automobile, automobile truck… or any other self-propelled vehicle not designed for