Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Ralph T. Miller and Joan Miller, Defendants.in Re Subpoena Duces Tecum of James M. Russ, Appellant
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. - 685 F.2d 123
Unit B*July 9, 1982
James M. Russ, pro se, Bruce S. Rogow, Fort Lauderdale, Fla., for appellant.
Donald E. Christopher, Asst. U. S. Atty., Orlando, Fla., M. Carr Ferguson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Michael L. Paup, Chief, R. Russell Mather, Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, Appellate Section, Washington, D. C., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
Before HILL, FAY and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Before issuance of the mandate in the instant case, the parties have brought to the attention of the court facts which render the case moot.
The court notes that the pretrial subpoena duces tecum at issue in this case was relevant only to the pending criminal tax fraud proceedings against the Millers, that these criminal proceedings have now been finalized, and that the instant case has therefore become moot. Accordingly, the previous opinion of this court published at 660 F.2d 563 (5th Cir. 1981), is vacated; the judgment of the district court holding appellant Russ in contempt is VACATED; and the case is REMANDED with instructions that the district court quash the subpoena and dismiss the case. United States v. Munsingwear, 340 U.S. 36, 39, 71 S.Ct. 104, 106, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950).