1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 597 F.3d
  5. 597 F.3d 189 (2010)
 

IN RE GRAND JURY SUBPOENA (T-112)

Nos. 06-2125, 07-1646, 06-2220, 06-2313.

597 F.3d 189 (2010)

In re GRAND JURY SUBPOENA (T-112) United States of America, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Under Seal # 10, Movant-Appellant. Under Seal # 1; Under Seal # 2; Under Seal # 3; Under Seal # 4; Under Seal # 5; Under Seal # 6; Under Seal # 7; Under Seal # 8; Under Seal # 9; Under Seal # 11; Under Seal # 12; Under Seal 13; Under Seal # 14; Under Seal # 15;, Under Seal # 16; Under Seal # 17, Under Seal # 18; Under Seal # 19; Under Seal # 20; Under Seal # 21; Under Seal # 22; Under Seal # 23; Under Seal # 24; Under Seal # 25; Under Seal # 26; Under Seal # 27; Under Seal # 28; Under Seal # 29; Under Seal # 30; Under Seal # 31; Under Seal # 32; Under Seal # 33; Under Seal # 34, Movants. In re Grand Jury Subpoena (T-112) United States of America, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Under Seal # 1-# 11, Movants-Appellants. In re Grand Jury Subpoena (T-112) United States of America, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Under Seal # 1; Under Seal # 2; Under Seal # 3; Under Seal # 4; Under Seal # 5; Under Seal # 6; Under Seal # 7; Under Seal # 8; Under Seal # 9; Under Seal # 10; Under Seal # 11, Movants-Appellants. Under Seal # 13, Movant. In re Grand Jury Subpoena (T-112) united states of America, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Under Seal # 1, Movant-Appellant.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Decided February 24, 2010.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

ARGUED: Steven Karl Barentzen, The Law Office of Steven Barentzen, Washington, DC; Nancy Anne Luque, Luque Geragos Marino, LLP, Washington, DC, for Appellants. Gordon D. Kromberg, Office of the United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Mitka T. Baker, DLA Piper U.S. LLP, Washington, DC, for Appellants. Chuck Rosenberg, United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge WILKINSON wrote the opinion, in which Judge SEYMOUR joined. Chief Judge TRAXLER wrote a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

WILKINSON, Circuit Judge:

The twelve interrelated corporations in this case refused to turn over documents demanded by grand jury subpoenas duces tecum and now appeal a district court decision holding them in civil contempt.1 One of the corporations, known as Appellant # 10, alleges that it was the subject of unlawful National Security Agency wiretapping. It thus claims it had just cause to refuse to comply with its subpoena on the basis...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases