28 U.S.C. § 515
Authority for legal proceedings; commission, oath, and salary for special attorneys
Historical and Revision Notes | ||
|---|---|---|
Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
(a) | ||
(b) | R.S. § 366. | |
|
| |
|
| |
| [Uncodified]. | Aug. 5, 1953, ch. 328, § 202 (1st and 2d provisos, as applicable to special assistants and special attorneys), 67 Stat. 375. |
| [Uncodified]. | July 2, 1954, ch. 456, § 202 (as applicable to special assistants and special attorneys), 68 Stat. 421. |
In subsection (a), the words “or counselor” are omitted as redundant. The words “United States attorneys” are substituted for “district attorneys” on authority of the Act of June 25, 1948, ch. 646, § 1, 62 Stat. 909. The words “any provision of” are omitted as unnecessary.
2002—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 107–273 struck out “at not more than $12,000” before period at end.
Words “magistrate judges” substituted for “magistrates” in subsec. (a) pursuant to section 321 of Pub. L. 101–650, set out as a note under section 631 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 150
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1967–2025 · leading case: United States v. Sells Eng'g, Inc., 463 U.S. 418 (1983).
United States v. Sells Eng'g, Inc., 463 U.S. 418 (1983). “Rule 54(c) defines the phrase expansively, to include "authorized assistant[s] of the Attorney General"; 28 U. S. C. § 515 (a) provides that the Attorney General may direct any attorney employed by the Department to conduct "any kind of legal proceeding, civil or criminal,…”
In re Grand Jury Investigation, 315 F. Supp. 3d 602 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “28 U.S.C. § 515 (b)...654 3. No Clear Statement Rule Regarding Inferior Officers' Appointment Exists.”
United States v. Harvey Birdman, United States of Am. v. William Richman, 602 F.2d 547 (3rd Cir. 1979). “DUAL EMPLOYMENT STATUS OF GOVERNMENT ATTORNEY Both defendants in this case also urge dismissal of the indictment on the ground that an impermissible conflict of interest inhered in Mr.”
In Re Grand Jury Subpoena of Alphonse Persico, 522 F.2d 41 (2d Cir. 1975). “PETERSEN Assistant Attorney General” The validity of this commission under the terms of 28 U.S.C. § 515 (a) constitutes the primary issue posed by the appellant in this case.”
United States v. Weyhrauch, 548 F.3d 1237 (9th Cir. 2008). “4 Because the ultimate authority to appoint an acting *1242 United States Attorney rests with the Attorney General under 28 U.S.C. § 515 (a), see Weyhrauch, 544 F.”
In Re Paul Perlin, a Witness Before the April 1977 Grand Jury, Paul Perlin, 589 F.2d 260 (7th Cir. 1978). “Koblenz was appointed on May 21, 1976, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 515 and § 543. Given the complexity of commodity trading, the U.”
United States v. Martin Sigillito, 759 F.3d 913 (8th Cir. 2014). “28 U.S.C. § 515 . Sigillito contends that the United States Attorney (USA) from the Western District USA had no authority to prosecute him because 28 U.”
United States v. Manafort, 312 F. Supp. 3d 60 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “Order ¶ (c); see also 28 U.S.C. § 515 ("[A]ny attorney specially appointed by the Attorney General under law, may .”
United States v. Batchelder, 442 U.S. 114 (1979). “Just as a defendant has no constitutional right to elect which of two applicable federal statutes shall be the basis of his indictment and prosecution, neither is he entitled to choose the penalty scheme under which he will be sentenced.”
United States v. Concord Mgmt. & Consulting LLC, 317 F. Supp. 3d 598 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “§ 533 (1) and 28 U.S.C. § 515 (b). See Opp'n at 24-35; Hr'g Tr.”
Michael Santo Polizzi v. United States of Am., Emprise Corp. v. United States, 550 F.2d 1133 (9th Cir. 1976). “Defendants also argue that the indictments under which they were charged should be dismissed because, they say, two Special Attorneys who appeared before the Grand Jury were not authorized as required by 28 U.S.C. § 515 (a). The errors to which they point are that the…”
United States v. David K. Morris, 532 F.2d 436 (5th Cir. 1976). “The first rests on the allegedly improper designation of Justice Department Special Attorney Edward Weiner who presented evidence before the grand jury that indicted the appellant and who later assisted the United States Attorney at trial.”
— 28 U.S.C. § 515(a) — 4 cases
United States v. Brown, 389 F. Supp. 959 (S.D.N.Y. 1975).
United States v. Agrusa, 392 F. Supp. 3 (W.D. Mo. 1975).
United States v. Dulski, 395 F. Supp. 1259 (E.D. Wis. 1975).
United States v. Weyhrauch (9th Cir. 2008).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.