Legal Opinion
Freeman v. BROWN BROTHERS HARRIMAN AND COMPANY
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 3, 1966PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FREDERICK van PELT BRYAN, District Judge:
The Secretary of Agriculture moves to compel enforcement of a subpoena duces tecum against respondent banking corporation, Brown Brothers Harriman and Company. Respondent opposes enforcement contending that the Secretary lacks authority to subpoena persons not subject to regulation under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act (the Act) (7 U.S.C. § 601 et seq.). The respondent also maintains the subpoena is invalid because it was not signed personally by the Secretary. Respondent’s customer Zausner, the records ’ of whose account are the subject of…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Richards v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Fleming v. Mohawk Wrecking & Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
- In re the Accounting of Guaranty Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1956
- Bracey v. LurayCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1943
- Federal Trade Commission v. W. W. Tuttle, Resident Manager, Ernst & ErnstCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Sid Casey v. Federal Trade Commission, Federal Trade Commission v. Sid CaseyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978
- Federal Maritime Commission v. New York Terminal ConferenceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1967
- United States v. Marshall Durbin & Co. Of Haleyville, Inc., and Marshall Durbin Broiler Production, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
- Federal Trade Commission v. RockefellerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1977
- United States v. Andrew E. Hill and J.E. Pinkerton, United States of America v. Dennis Juren, United States of America v. Edward W. CromeyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.