In Re: Grand Jury Subpoena: Grand Jury Subpoena, No. R91-071. United States of Am., & Under Seal v. Under Seal, 92 F.3d 1178 (4th Cir. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
In Re: Grand Jury Subpoena: Grand Jury Subpoena, No. R91-071. United States of Am., & Under Seal v. Under Seal, 92 F.3d 1178 (4th Cir. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
53 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Washington State Republican Party v. STATE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE COMMISSION (wash, 2000-07-27)
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995 2010 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Washington State Republican Party v. STATE PUBLIC DISCLOSURE COMMISSION
Wash. · 2000 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Federal Election Comm'n v. Christian Action Network, 894 F.Supp. 946 (W.D.Va.1995), aff'd, 92 F.3d 1178 (11th Cir.1996); Maine Right to Life Comm., Inc. v. Federal Election Comm'n, 914 F.Supp. 8 , aff'd, 98 F.3d 1 (1st Cir.1996), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 810 , 118 S.Ct. 52 , 139 L.Ed.2d 17 (1997). *835 The majority disagrees with the trial court's approach to this case.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Federal Election Commission v. Christian Action Network, Inc.
4th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., FEC v. Christian Action Network, 894 F.Supp. 946 (W.D.Va.1995), aff'd per curiam, 92 F.3d 1178 , 1996 WL 431996 (4th Cir.1996); FEC v. Survival Education Fund, No. 89 Civ. 0347, 1994 WL 9658 (S.D.N.Y.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Federal Election Com'n v. Christian Action Network, Inc.
4th Cir. · 1997 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., FEC v. Christian Action Network, 894 F.Supp. 946 (W.D.Va.1995), aff'd per curiam, 92 F.3d 1178 , 1996 WL 431996 (4th Cir.1996); FEC v. Survival Education Fund, No. 89 Civ. 0347, 1994 WL 9658 (S.D.N.Y.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Maine Right to Life Committee, Inc. v. Federal Election Commission
1st Cir. · 1996 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Maine Right to Life Committee, 914 F.Supp. 8 ; see also Federal Election Commission v. Christian Action Network, 894 F.Supp. 946 (W.D.Va.1995), aff 'd per curiam, 92 F.3d 1178 (table), No. 95-2600, (4th Cir. Aug. 2, 1996) (unpublished disposition) (granting defendants’ motion to dismiss on the grounds that the complained-of actions did not constitute violations of FECA, and the FEC lacked jurisdiction to bring suit).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In Re: Grand Jury Subpoena: Grand Jury Subpoena, No. R91-071. United States of America, and Under Seal
v.
Under Seal
94-5463.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jun 3, 1996.
92 F.3d 1178
Unpublished

92 F.3d 1178

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
In Re: Grand Jury Subpoena: Grand Jury Subpoena, No. R91-071.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
and
Under Seal, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
UNDER SEAL, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 94-5463.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued February 3, 1995.
Decided June 3, 1996.

ARGUED: Thomas P. Vartanian, FRIED, FRANK, HARRIS, SHRIVER & JACOBSON, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Roger

William Frydrychowski, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia; Clarence Mosley Dunnaville, HILL, TUCKER & MARSH, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Jack B. Gordon, Bruce J. Casino, FRIED, FRANK, HARRIS, SHRIVER & JACOBSON, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Helen F. Fahey, United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia; Jack B. Patrick, Trial Attorney, Fraud Section, Criminal Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant challenges the district court's order concerning his motion to remedy and restrict disclosure of information revealed before a federal grand jury. We held disposition of this case in abeyance pending decision in Finn v. Schiller, No. 94-2373 (Jan. 3, 1996). Under Finn, although a district court has the authority to enter an appropriate order of civil or criminal contempt in response to notification of such a violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e), there is no private cause of action under the Rule. Therefore, on the authority of Finn, we vacate the district court's order decided on the merits of appellant's Rule 6(e) motion, and remand for further proceedings consistent with that opinion.

2

VACATED AND REMANDED.