Legal Opinion
In Re Subpoenas Duces Tecum Nos. A99-0001, A99-0002, A99-0003 & A99-0004
District Court, W.D. Virginia
Decided June 23, 1999No. 1:99MC00005, 1:99MC00006PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SARGENT, United States Magistrate Judge.
I. Background and Facts
This matter came before the court for hearing on May 17, 1999, on motions to quash, (“the Motions to Quash”), certain subpoenas duces tecum served on a local physician and three health care providers by the United States Attorney for the Western District of Virginia pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3486. These matters were referred to the undersigned for hearing and determination pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(A).
While no evidentiary hearing has been held in this matter, certain facts appear uncontested by the…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San FranciscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Whalen v. RoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re: Administrative Subpoena John Doe, D.P.M. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
- Pattison Bros. Mississippi River Terminal, Inc. v. Iowa District Court for Clayton CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 2001
- Fitzgerald v. WatkinsDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2023