Legal Opinion

United States v. Witmer

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 9, 1993No. Misc. 93-071PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

RAMBO, Chief Judge.

Before the court are the motions of Respondents Witmer and Kelly (hereafter “Witmer/Kelly” or “Respondents”) for leave to serve discovery on Petitioner and to stay enforcement of the CIDs issued with respect to them. Also pending is the Government’s motion to strike Witmer and Kelly’s joint reply to the discovery motion or, in the alternative, for leave to file a sur-reply. Briefs have been filed and the motions are ripe for disposition.

Background

This case involves a dispute over the issuance by the Attorney General and attempted enforcement by the Justice…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Federal Trade Commission v. Invention Submission CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1992
  2. Hyster Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
  3. United States v. Anthony G. MedeirosCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
  4. United States v. MedeirosDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1989
  5. Associated Container Transportation (Australia) Ltd. v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1980

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. Ronald P. MarkwoodCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1995
  2. United States v. WitmerDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
  3. Kersavage v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1996
  4. In Re Oral Testimony of a Witness Subpoenaed Pursuant to a Civil Investigative Demand No. 98-19District Court, E.D. Virginia · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API