Marston's, Inc. v. Strand
Arizona Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partGordon, Justice
(specially concurring in part and dissenting in part):
While I agree with much of the majority opinion, particularly in the first two sections, I am compelled to specially concur in the first two parts and dissent as to the third section.
I agree that a fair construction of the appropriate Arizona statutes grants the grand jury the power to issue a subpoena duces tecum for corporate records. Where I disagree with the majority is in the conditions which must be met before this power of the grand jury may be exerted: certain procedural aspects of when and how the subpoenas may be issued are…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- United States v. DionisioSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Hale v. HenkelSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Oklahoma Press Publishing Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- In Re Grand Jury Proceedings. In Re Jacqueline Schofield, WitnessCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973
- Bunnell v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.