# In Re Grand Jury Proceedings, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. In the Matter of Joques Egan

> Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · December 14, 1971 · 450 F.2d 199

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9457486

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS, HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA. in the Matter of Joques EGAN, Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- **Decided:** December 14, 1971
- **Citations:** 450 F.2d 199
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Rosenn
- **Judges:** Forman, Aldisert, Gibbons, Hastie, Seitz, Van Dusen, Adams, Rosenn
- **Cited by:** 59 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9457486

## Opinion text

ROSENN, Circuit Judge,
in addition to filing a separate concurring opinion, joins in Part II of this opinion.
In view of the positions- of the judges constituting the majority, the judgment of contempt will be vacated and the case remanded for a hearing to determine whether the questions propounded to Sister Egan resulted from illegal electronic surveillance directed at her. 26
. A number of additional issues were raised by appellant. These include the questions whether the authorization by the Attorney General and the United States Attorney was in conformity with the Statute, whether the second immunity *218 application was in accord with the Act, whether the scope of the questions exceeded the grant of immunity, and whether the Fifth Amendment may be infringed despite immunity when the questions exceed the scope of immunity. However, in view of the fact that the rehearing en bane was convened primarily to hear argument regarding the use of illegal electronic surveillance in interrogating a grand jury witness, we have not considered them here.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9457486. Public record. Not legal advice.