Legal Opinion

United States v. Linen Service Council of New Jersey

District Court, D. New Jersey

Decided June 1, 1956No. Crim. A. 107-55PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEANEY, District Judge.

The questions raised on the motion to quash subpoenae duces tecum are these: 1st,- are the subpoenae too general in terms and not specifically indicative of the documents required; and 2nd, whether the subpoenae served on such of the parties as were partnerships are properly directed, and whether if the subpoenae are held to be valid, immunity will be granted to the partners, upon production of the records referred to in the subpoenae. In so far as the first question is concerned it seems to this court that the subpoenae are sufficiently specific with the amendment made…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. United States v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  3. Wilson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  4. Essgee Co. of China v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  5. United States v. LawnDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1953

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Fielder v. Berkeley Properties Co.California Court of Appeal · 1972
  2. In the Matter of United States of America v. Harry G. SilversteinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
  3. In re September, 1975 Special Grand JuryDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1977
  4. In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces TecumDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1972
  5. United States v. SilversteinDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1962

2 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