Legal Opinion

United States v. Kiamie

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided December 21, 1955PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS F. MURPHY, District Judge.

These are cross motions calling for resolution of the recurring problem of the construction of Rules 16 and 17(c) of the F.R.C.P., 18 U.S.C.A. Defendant Fareed N. Kiamie moves for discovery and inspection of his own question and answer statement taken by the Internal Revenue Bureau and those of four of his employees all taken stenographically but not signed some five years ago. In aid of this motion defendant served a subpoena under Rule 17 (c) for the same papers and the government moves to quash.

The issues involved have been litigated many times in the past…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Bowman Dairy Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  2. United States v. IoziaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1952
  3. Shores v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1949
  4. United States v. PeltzDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1955
  5. Fryer v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1953

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Harold L. Peek, Jr., and Susanna E. Peek v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963
  2. United States v. BentvenaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1960
  3. United States v. AnthonyDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1956
  4. United States v. StrombergDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1957
  5. United States v. BensonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1957

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API