Opinion

Ellis Campbell, Jr., District Director of Internal Revenue v. J. M. Eastland and Montez Eastland

  • 307 F.2d 478
  • 6 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 641
  • 10 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5279
  • 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 4425
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Filed
Jul 23, 1962
Status
Published
Author
Bell
On the bench
Brown, Wisdom, Bell
Cited by
258 cases

holding that allowing civil discovery during a criminal investigation would create "an open invitation to [parties] under criminal investigation to subvert the civil rules into a device for obtaining pre-trial discovery against the ■ Government in criminal proceedings”

How later courts described this case

  • holding that allowing civil discovery during a criminal investigation would create "an open invitation to [parties] under criminal investigation to subvert the civil rules into a device for obtaining pre-trial discovery against the ■ Government in criminal proceedings”
  • stating that, when appropriate, “the trial judge should use [her] discretion to narrow the range of discovery” for civil proceedings in which a defendant is the subject of a criminal investigation
  • stating that “[a]dministrative policy gives priority to the public interest in law enforcement” regarding the issue of “which case should be tried first”
  • holding that liberal civil discovery procedures are not a “back door” to information otherwise beyond reach under the criminal discovery rules

Written by the judges who cited it.

Distinguished

  • Distinguished by Founding Church of Scientology of Washington, D. C., Inc. v. Kelley, 77 F.R.D. 378 (1977)

    Therefore, the Court rejects the argument advanced by the plaintiff/movants that the Campbell principle is inapplicable to a person who is not yet a criminal defendant.
    District Court, District of ColumbiaNov 29, 1977Read it

The opinion

BELL, Circuit Judge

(concurring specially).

I concur in the result only. My view is simply that the trial court abused its discretion under the facts in finding the necessary good cause for the production of the reports then in the criminal files of the United States attorney for use in the civil case. 4 Moore’s Federal Practice (2nd ed.), § 34.04.

The criminal aspect of the matter could not be ignored. The end result *493 was tantamount to allowing discovery under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in a criminal proceeding, somthing we are powerless, as was the trial court, to authorize. The motion of the government to stay pending disposition of the criminal case should have been granted, and of course, all proceedings thereafter were nugatory.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.