Cook v. United States

D. Oregon

Cook v. United States

69 F. Supp. 445, 1946 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1939

CourtDistrict Court, D. Oregon

DecidedNovember 18, 1946

DocketCivil Action No. 3329

StatusPublished

This text of 69 F. Supp. 445 (Cook v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cook v. United States, 69 F. Supp. 445, 1946 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1939 (D. Or. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

McCOLLOCH, District Judge.

While, as I stated at the argument, a judge need not in every case decline to enforce an administrative subpoena because too broad, nevertheless the urgency is so great to get the country back to peace time procedure, as well as “Peace Time Economy,” the declared objective of the agency here involved, I do not feel justified in indulging in presumptions to bolster subpoenas, issued like this one, by a subordinate agency employee. The subpoena will be quashed because indefinite as to time.

I might add: I do not understand that a minor Government official can summon people at will to give testimony about their affairs and the affairs of their customers and neighbors. A United States Attorney cannot do that.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

McCOLLOCH, District Judge.

While, as I stated at the argument, a judge need not in every case decline to enforce an administrative subpoena because too broad, nevertheless the urgency is so great to get the country back to peace time procedure, as well as “Peace Time Economy,” the declared objective of the agency here involved, I do not feel justified in indulging in presumptions to bolster subpoenas, issued like this one, by a subordinate agency employee. The subpoena will be quashed because indefinite as to time.

I might add: I do not understand that a minor Government official can summon people at will to give testimony about their affairs and the affairs of their customers and neighbors. A United States Attorney cannot do that.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 F. Supp. 445, 1946 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1939, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cook-v-united-states-ord-1946.