From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States Steel Corporation v. Mattingly

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Aug 12, 1980
663 F.2d 68 (10th Cir. 1980)

Summary

holding that “the District Court erred in enforcing the subpoena [of a private company against a non-party federal employee]” because such an issue was “controlled by [Touhy] and Saunders v. The Great Western Sugar Company, 396 F.2d 794, (10th Cir. 1968)”

Summary of this case from Aero Tech, Inc. v. Great Am. Ins. Co.

Opinion

No. 80-1647.

August 12, 1980.

Lee Dale, Sherman Howard, Denver, Colo., John R. McCall, Middleton Reutlinger, Louisville, Ky., for United States Steel Corporation.

Joseph F. Dolan, U.S. Atty., C. Scott Crabtree, Asst. U.S. Atty., Denver, Colo., Leonard Schaitman, John C. Hoyle, Civil Division, Appellate Staff, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., Benjamin Civiletti, Atty. Gen., Alice Daniel, Asst. Atty. Gen., William P. Arnold, David H. White, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C. for Bruce W. Christ.

Before BARRETT, BREITENSTEIN and DOYLE, Circuit Judges.


ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the motion of appellee, United States Steel Corporation, to vacate the order of this Court granting the government's motion for temporary stay of the order of the United States District Court compelling enforcement of a subpoena directed by United States Steel Corporation against appellant, Bruce W. Christ, an employee of the Bureau of Standards.

Upon consideration of the record, the briefs, and the oral arguments, we have concluded that the motion of United States Steel Corporation for vacation of our temporary stay must be denied and that the merits of this dispute are controlled by United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462, 71 S.Ct. 416, 95 L.Ed. 417 (1951) and Saunders v. The Great Western Sugar Company, 396 F.2d 794 (10th Cir. 1968). Thus, we hold that the District Court erred in enforcing the subpoena.

The judgment of the District Court is reversed and the cause is remanded with directions to recall the subpoena and dismiss all proceedings with regard thereto.


Summaries of

United States Steel Corporation v. Mattingly

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Aug 12, 1980
663 F.2d 68 (10th Cir. 1980)

holding that “the District Court erred in enforcing the subpoena [of a private company against a non-party federal employee]” because such an issue was “controlled by [Touhy] and Saunders v. The Great Western Sugar Company, 396 F.2d 794, (10th Cir. 1968)”

Summary of this case from Aero Tech, Inc. v. Great Am. Ins. Co.

In United States Steel Corporation v. Mattingly, 663 F.2d 68 (10th Cir. 1980), the Tenth Circuit reversed a district court's order compelling enforcement of a subpoena against an employee of the United States Bureau of Standards. The court explicitly stated that it based its reversal on Touhy, and held that it could not compel the agency employee to testify or produce documents in violation of agency Touhy regulations.

Summary of this case from Armstrong v. Arcanum Grp., Inc.

In Mattingly, 663 F.2d at 68, the circuit court cited Touhy and Saunders and again reversed an order of the trial court compelling a subordinate government agent to testify and produce documents in response to a subpoena issued in a private action to which the government was not a party.

Summary of this case from Ceroni v. 4front Engineered Solutions Inc.

In Mattingly, 663 F.3d at 68, the circuit court cited Touhy andSaunders and again reversed an order of the trial court compelling a subordinate government agent to testify and produce documents in response to a subpoena issued in a private action to which the government was not a party.

Summary of this case from Ceroni v. 4FRONT Engineered Solutions, Inc.

in Mattingly, the Tenth Circuit ordered the district court to recall a subpoena that had been issued to a Bureau of Standards employee.

Summary of this case from Tholen Supply Co., Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co.

In United States Steel Corporation v. Mattingly, 663 F.2d 68 (10th Cir. 1980), the Tenth Circuit reversed a District Court order compelling enforcement of a subpoena against an employee of the United States Bureau of Standards.

Summary of this case from Smith v. C.R.C. Builders Co., Inc.
Case details for

United States Steel Corporation v. Mattingly

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. GOBEL MATTINGLY…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

Date published: Aug 12, 1980

Citations

663 F.2d 68 (10th Cir. 1980)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Watkins

See United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462, 470 (1951). See also Boron Oil Co. v. Downie, 873…

Tholen Supply Co., Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co.

The Tenth Circuit has recognized this same privilege. See United States Steel Corp. v. Mattingly, 663 F.2d 68…