42 U.S.C. § 2281

Contempt proceedings

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar

In case of failure or refusal to obey a subpena served upon any person pursuant to section 2201(c) of this title, the district court for any district in which such person is found or resides or transacts business, upon application by the Attorney General on behalf of the United States, shall have jurisdiction to issue an order requiring such person to appear and give testimony or to appear and produce documents, or both, in accordance with the subpena; and any failure to obey such order of the court may be punished by such court as a contempt thereof.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1980–1995 · leading case: United States v. Oncology Servs. Corp., 60 F.3d 1015 (3rd Cir. 1995).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Oncology Servs. Corp., 60 F.3d 1015 (3rd Cir. 1995). · cites it 2× “Oncology Services did not produce the balance of the documents, causing the NRC to file a petition for summary enforcement of its administrative subpoena, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2281 , on November 15, 1993. The district court initially granted enforcement but subsequently…”

United States v. Garde, 673 F. Supp. 604 (D.D.C. 1987). “On August 14, 1987, the government filed this petition to enforce the subpoena under 42 U.S.C. § 2281 (1982), which allows the district court to order testimony and production of documents and to punish failure to obey such an order as contempt.”

United States v. McGovern, 87 F.R.D. 584 (M.D. Penn. 1980). “§ 2201 (c) for a legitimate purpose and that enforcement of the subpoenas should be granted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2281 . In support of its petition, petitioner submitted an affidavit of Victor Stello wherein he sets forth the need for continued NRC investigations in the three…”

United States v. Oncology (3rd Cir. 1995). “The NRC appeals the district court's dismissal of the petition for enforcement as moot and its failure to grant summary enforcement of the subpoena absent a claim of privilege or a showing that the documents were irrelevant to any NRC investigation.”

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.