United States v. Southwest Nat. Bank
Decision Date | 29 March 1979 |
Docket Number | No. 5-35.,5-35. |
Citation | 598 F.2d 600 |
Parties | UNITED STATES of America and Harold Clements, II, Acting Regional Counsel, Department of Energy, Petitioners-Appellees, v. SOUTHWEST NATIONAL BANK, Defendant-Appellant, J. R. Adams, Intervenor-Appellant, OKC Corp., Applicant for Intervention-Appellant. |
Court | U.S. Temporary Emergency Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Timothy J. Herman, Rogers, Hughes & Herman, Austin, Tex., Earl L. Yeakel, III, Kammerman, Yeakel & Overstreet, Austin, Tex., Arthur Mitchell, and G. Scott Damuth, OKC Corp., Dallas, Tex., were on brief, for defendant-appellant.
Eloise E. Davies, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., with whom Barbara Allen Babcock, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Jamie C. Boyd, U. S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., were on brief, for petitioners-appellees.
Before ESTES, JOHNSON and GEWIN, Judges.
On January 4, 1979, a joint notice of appeal was filed by the First City National Bank of El Paso (Bank), J. R. Adams, and OKC Corp. (OKC). The Bank appeals from an order entered by the District Court on December 15, 1978, denying its motion for rehearing under F.R.Civ.P. (R.) 60(b); Adams appeals from an order entered by the District Court on December 21, 1978, denying its motion for rehearing under R. 60(b); and OKC appeals from an order entered by the District Court on December 15, 1978, denying its post-judgment motion to intervene under R. 24.1
On January 12, 1979, the government (Appellee) moved for dismissal of this appeal on the grounds that the District Court's denial of the Bank's and Adams' motions for rehearing was not an abuse of discretion; that the District Court's denial of OKC's post-judgment motion to intervene was not an abuse of discretion; and that Appellants' allegations of a "tainted" DOE civil investigation cannot transform a subpoena enforcement proceeding into a trial.
In their reply of January 24, 1979 to the Appellee's Motion to Dismiss, the Appellants urge that the District Court should hear "all relevant evidence as to the taking of the report by the DOE . . .,"5 that the District Court did in fact have jurisdiction to rule on the R. 60(b) motions, and that OKC is entitled to intervene under R. 24(a) or R. 24(b).
Appellants' argument that the DOE investigation is "tainted" by the use of the OKC Report, an allegedly privileged document, cannot be entertained as a defense against enforcement of the subpoena issued to the Bank. Issuance of a subpoena comes at an early stage of administrative action, as this Court recognized in United States v. Empire Gas, supra at 1152, n. 3:
This is only the commencement of administrative procedures which must be exhausted prior to agency determination of violations of the Mandatory Allocation and Price Regulations. See City of New York v. New York Telephone Co., 468 F.2d 1401, 1402 (Em.App.1972).
Section 211 of the Economic Stabilization Act, as amended, 12 U.S.C. § 1904 note (ESA), now incorporated in § 5(a)(1) of the Emergency Petroleum Allocation Act of 1973, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 751 et seq. (EPAA), "was...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Texas Energy Petroleum Corp.
...(1981); U.S. v. Bell, 564 F.2d 953 (Em.App.1977); U.S. v. First City National Bank, 598 F.2d 594 (Em. App.1979); U.S. v. Southwest National Bank, 598 F.2d 600 (Em.App.1979); U.S. v. Wickland, 619 F.2d 75 (Em.App.1980); U.S. v. Pel-Star Energy, Inc., 670 F.2d 1032 (Em.App.1982); U.S. v. Fitc......
-
Dyke v. Gulf Oil Corp.
...Energy Admin., 559 F.2d 1190 (Em.App.1977), as one of our numerous decisions dealing with exception relief. 36 United States v. Southwest Nat'l Bank, 598 F.2d 600 (Em.App.1979). 37 Needless to say, merely pretensional, insubstantial or manipulative claims of the invalidity of agency orders ......
-
United States v. RFB Petroleum, Inc., 5-90.
...633 F.2d 956, 959 (TECA 1980), cert. denied, 450 U.S. 995, 101 S.Ct. 1698, 68 L.Ed.2d 195 (1981), quoting United States v. Southwest National Bank, 598 F.2d 600 (Em.App.1979). The government made its prima facie case by submitting the petition and declaration attached thereto which plainly ......
-
Sunshine Gas Co. v. United States Dept. of Energy, Civ. A. No. CA-4-80-205.
...of proceeding would make a shambles of the investigation and stifle the agency in its gathering of facts. United States v. Southwest National Bank, 598 F.2d 600, 602-03 (Em.App.1979) (quoting from Hannah v. Larche, 363 U.S. 420, 443-44, 80 S.Ct. 1502, 1515-16, 4 L.Ed.2d 1307 (1960)); that s......