United States v. Ralph T. Miller and Joan Miller, in Re Subpoena Duces Tecum of James M. Russ

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Ralph T. Miller and Joan Miller, in Re Subpoena Duces Tecum of James M. Russ

685 F.2d 123, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17576

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJuly 9, 1982

Docket80-5912

StatusPublished

Cited by22 cases

This text of 685 F.2d 123 (United States v. Ralph T. Miller and Joan Miller, in Re Subpoena Duces Tecum of James M. Russ) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Ralph T. Miller and Joan Miller, in Re Subpoena Duces Tecum of James M. Russ, 685 F.2d 123, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17576 (5th Cir. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Before issuance of the mandate in the instant case, the parties have brought to the attention of the court facts which render the case moot.

The court notes that the pretrial subpoena duces tecum at issue in this case was relevant only to the pending criminal tax fraud proceedings against the Millers, that these criminal proceedings have now been finalized, and that the instant case has therefore become moot. Accordingly, the previous opinion of this court published at 660 F.2d 563 (5th Cir. 1981), is vacated; the judgment of the district court holding appellant Russ in contempt is VACATED; and the case is REMANDED with instructions that the district court quash the subpoena and dismiss the case. United States v. Munsingwear, 340 U.S. 36, 39, 71 S.Ct. 104, 106, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950).

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

PER CURIAM:

Before issuance of the mandate in the instant case, the parties have brought to the attention of the court facts which render the case moot.

The court notes that the pretrial subpoena duces tecum at issue in this case was relevant only to the pending criminal tax fraud proceedings against the Millers, that these criminal proceedings have now been finalized, and that the instant case has therefore become moot. Accordingly, the previous opinion of this court published at 660 F.2d 563 (5th Cir. 1981), is vacated; the judgment of the district court holding appellant Russ in contempt is VACATED; and the case is REMANDED with instructions that the district court quash the subpoena and dismiss the case. United States v. Munsingwear, 340 U.S. 36, 39, 71 S.Ct. 104, 106, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950).

Oklahoma Radio Associates, an Oklahoma General Partnership of J. Patrick Collins and Greg L. Armstrong J. Patrick Collins, an Individual and Greg L. Armstrong, an Individual v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for Citizens National Bank and Trust Company v. Magnolia Broadcasting Company, Inc., Third-Party

3 F.3d 1436 (Third Circuit, 1993)

Oklahoma Radio Associates v. Federal Deposit Insurance

3 F.3d 1436 (Tenth Circuit, 1993)

David A. Clarke v. United States

915 F.2d 699 (D.C. Circuit, 1990)

United States v. Jay L. Gibson

916 F.2d 13 (D.C. Circuit, 1990)

Showtime/the Movie Channel, Inc. v. Covered Bridge Condominium Ass'n

895 F.2d 711 (Eleventh Circuit, 1990)

Showtime/The Movie Channel, Inc. v. Covered Bridge Condominium Association, Inc.

895 F.2d 711 (Third Circuit, 1990)

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Forma

117 F.R.D. 516 (S.D. New York, 1987)

Lettsome v. Waggoner

672 F. Supp. 858 (Virgin Islands, 1987)

Tucker v. State

484 So. 2d 1299 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)

In Re Martha R. Kave

760 F.2d 343 (First Circuit, 1985)

United States v. Lawrence L. Ghidoni

732 F.2d 814 (Eleventh Circuit, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

685 F.2d 123, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 17576, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ralph-t-miller-and-joan-miller-in-re-subpoena-duces-ca5-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack