Lawhon v. United States

Decision Date13 June 1968
Docket NumberNo. 24763.,24763.
Citation390 F.2d 663
PartiesRaleigh H. LAWHON, as President of R. H. Lawhon Groves, Inc., et al., Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America and Frank W. Bown, Special Agent of the Internal Revenue Service, Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Norman H. Lipoff, Thomas D. Aitken, Michel G. Emmanuel, H. Diane Breithaupt, Carlton, Fields, Ward Emmanuel, Smith & Cutler, Tampa, Fla., for appellants.

William A. Meadows, Jr., U. S. Atty., Tampa, Fla., Mitchell Rogovin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson, Joseph M. Howard, John M. Brant, John P. Burke, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for appellees.

Before TUTTLE and GOLDBERG, Circuit Judges, and HOOPER, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

It appearing without dispute that the books and records of the Lawhon corporations, which were the subject of the order to produce entered by the trial court in this case, have long since been produced and have subsequently been returned to the corporations, there is nothing on this appeal for this court to decide.

The appeal is dismissed for mootness.

ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

The motion for reconsideration is denied. This motion, in effect, seeks to have this court give an advisory opinion as to the admissibility in evidence of the records or their product in the event of a subsequent criminal trial. Such event may not occur. This court passes no judgment on the question whether, if the mooted records are used in a subsequent prosecution of the taxpayers, if there be one, their introduction would be forbidden as violating the constitutional rights of the defendants.

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Gluck v. U.S., s. 84-5323
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • August 28, 1985
    ...does not in itself justify appellate consideration of the propriety of the summons when compliance has mooted appeal); Lawhon v. United States, 390 F.2d 663 (5th Cir.1968) (same). These courts have generally recognized that once compliance has mooted an appeal, to address the question of su......
  • U.S. v. Barrett
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • February 24, 1988
    ...v. United States, 406 F.2d 526, 527 (5th Cir.1969); Grathwohl v. United States, 401 F.2d 166, 167 (5th Cir.1968); Lawhon v. United States, 390 F.2d 663, 663 (5th Cir.1968). Thus, in Sherlock we held that since Sherlock complied with the summons, his appeal was moot. Sherlock's argument that......
  • Grand Jury Proceedings, In re
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • June 12, 1998
    ...primarily on two prior decisions, United States v. First American Bank, 649 F.2d 288 (5th Cir. Unit B 1981), 11 and Lawhon v. United States, 390 F.2d 663 (5th Cir.1968), both of which were effectively overruled by Scientology. In Scientology, the Church of Scientology ("Scientology") appeal......
  • Office of Thrift Supervision Dept. of Treasury v. Dobbs
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • May 3, 1991
    ...regarding future admissibility of subpoenaed materials would be in the nature of an advisory opinion) (citing Lawhon v. United States, 390 F.2d 663 (5th Cir.1968)). Because appellant seeks only to seal his testimony against future use, we find that his appeal became moot upon his compliance......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT