538 F.2d 435 (D.C. Cir. 1976), 74-1906, In re Ryan
|Citation:||538 F.2d 435|
|Party Name:||In re Raymond J. RYAN and Helen Ryan, U.S. Tax Court No. 4800-69.|
|Case Date:||June 28, 1976|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit|
Argued Oct. 28, 1975.
Rehearing Denied July 30, 1976.
Nathan Lewin, Washington, D. C., with whom Raymond G. Larroca, Washington, D. C., was on the brief for appellants. Herbert J. Miller, Washington, D. C., also entered an appearance for appellants.
Charles E. Brookhart, Atty., Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for appellee. Scott P. Crampton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Gilbert E. Andrews, Jonathan S. Cohen, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., were on the brief for appellee.
Before BAZELON, Chief Judge, HASTIE, [*] Senior Circuit Judge for the Third Circuit and ROBB, Circuit Judge.
Senior Circuit Judge HASTIE participated in the consideration of this case but died before opinion was entered.
Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge ROBB.
ROBB, Circuit Judge:
On August 8, 1974 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 6002 and 6003 the United States District Court for the District of Columbia entered an order directing the appellants to "give testimony or provide other information and produce documents which they refuse to give or to provide on the basis of their privilege against self-incrimination as to all matters about which they may be interrogated before the United States Tax Court." The Ryans challenge that order.
On January 18, 1974, pursuant to Rule 71 of the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue served upon the Ryans written interrogatories and a request for production of documents. The interrogatories and requested documents concerned certain business transactions relevant to deficiency determinations awaiting adjudication in the Tax Court. The Ryans objected to the interrogatories, upon the ground among others that the information and documents requested were irrelevant and that compulsory disclosure would violate the Ryans' privilege against self-incrimination. After a hearing the Tax Court ordered the Ryans to answer, and thereafter a motion for reconsideration was denied. The Ryans appealed from that order to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit; they also filed with that court a petition for a writ of mandamus directing the chief judge of the Tax Court to vacate the...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP