The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

Similar documents
The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database

Transcription:

The Burger Court Opinion Writing Database United States v. Kordel 397 U.S. 1 (1970) Paul J. Wahlbeck, George Washington University James F. Spriggs, II, Washington University Forrest Maltzman, George Washington University

Attprv=t grand of tirr err 3tatto AteltittOtan. Q. 2X1)&g CHAMBERS OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE February 19, 1970 Re: No. 87 - U. S. v. Kordel Dear Potter:.I agree. with your proposal in Memo of February 17, 1970. W. E. B. Mr. Justice Stewart cc: The Conference

February seventh 1970 Dear Potter: In No. 87 -- United States v. Nordel,s 1 voted the other way. But I have decided not to note my dissent nor to write in dissent, but to acquiesce in the opinion as you have written it. If, however, someone else writes in dissents I will reconsider the whole question at that time. But unless you hear from me, you can count me as being with you. William 0. Douglas Nr. Jogice Stswert

1,177.r1L 7RWTTIMENIC.,- REPRODUCED FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE 'MANU '2- 'SCRIPT

00114405ta;,;,1 titt LP. 20g4g CoaftmEDIS-49 10Pw wows 06 40 'bruary 10, 1970 States v. Kordel Dear me. Ided. Please join ro Mr. s,te)\ cc: '-_ - 9",-.(-*re\ rt O

;$4frtia4 QTauxt of tile Pirite.4. tatts Wasfriztritcrn, p. Q. 2i:1 4g CHAMBERS or JUSTICE WM. J. BRENNAN, JR. February 18, 1970 RE: No. 87 - United States v. Kordel Dear Potter: I agree with your recommendation in the above that the corporation's application for rehearing be denied without comment on the Order List following announcement of the opinion in the above. 0 Ir M.1 Oz cra Sincerely, W. J. B. Jr. Mr. Justice Stewart cc: The Conference

To: The Chief Justice Mr. Justice Flar!k Mr. Justice Dr.m3las Justice Harlan ft*. Justice Brennan 2 Mr. Justice White SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES mi.' Justice Marshall Pt, NO. 87.-OCTOBER TERM, 1969 From: St ewart-,e J. 6 197.! s Circulated OnWritof Certiorari si tz United State, Petitioner, the United V. Court of Appeals for Lelord Kordel and Alfred Feldten. the Sixth Circuit. [February, 1970] MR. JUSTICE STEWART delivered the opinion of the Court. The respondents are the president and vice president. 0=1 respectively, of Detroit Vital Foods, Inc. They were convicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, along with the corporation, for violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.' The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed the respondents' convictions on the ground that -the,government's use of interrogatories to obtain evidence from the respondents in a nearly contemporaneous civil condemnation proceeding operated to violate their Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination. = We granted certiorari to consider the constitutional questions raised by the Government's invocation of simultaneous civil and criminal proceedings in the enforcement of federal law.= In March 1960 the Division of Regulatory Management of the Food and Drug Administration (hereafter 21 U. S. C. 301 et seq. 3 United States v. Detroit Vital Foods, Inc., 407 F. 2d 570. The Court of Appeals initially reversed the judgments of conviction of all three defendants, but on the Government's petition for rehearing it affirmed with respect to the corporation. 3 305 U. S. 932. 0z

3 To: The Chief Justice Mr. Justice Black Mr. Justice Dsuglas MLT,. Justice Larlan Justice Brennan Mr. Justice White Mr"r"'Ittrrrarnrrrtaa Mr. Justice Marshal.. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STT,E.S A _t, From: S wart, J. tv O. 87.-OCTOBER TERM, 1969 Circulated: = n FEB 1 0 1,.:Ig On Writ of Certiorarir United States, Petitioner, -, -,. : to the United States o v. z Court of Appeals for Lelord Kordel and Alfred Feldten. the Sixth Circuit. [February, 1970] n 0 r m MR. JUSTICE STEWART delivered the opinion of the n 1-3 Court. 1-1 O The respondents are the president and vice president, czn respectively, of Detroit Vital Foods, Inc. They were 0.4 convicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, along with the corporation, for violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.i The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit re- = versed the respondents' convictions on the ground that cn n the Government's use of interrogatories to obtain evi- Pd " dence from the respondents in a nearly contemporaneous iv 0-3 civil,conclemnation..proceeding. operated.to violate their.= 1-4 Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-in- c 1-i crimination. 2 We granted certiorari to consider the cn P--1 questions raised by the Government's invocation of a simultaneous civil and criminal proceedings in the enforcement of federal law.' * ri 1.-4 In March 1960 the Division of Regulatory Management of the Food and Drug Administration (hereafter E cd.-4 0 1 21 U. S. C. 301 et seq. 1.21 2 United States v. Detroit Vital Foods, Inc., 407 F. 2d 570. The n Court of Appeals initially reversed the judgments of conviction of cd z all three defendants, but on the Government's petition for rehearing cn it affirmed with respect to the corporation. cn 3 395 U. S. 932. cn

./ fry 4 ThLer Justice 777,iCe. Black. Mr. Justice Douglas Mr. Justice Harlan Mr. Justice Brennan Mr. Justice White itrz---je rarters Mr. Justice Marshall SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATE& : Stewart, J. pi Circulated: NO. K. OCTOBER TERM, 1969 S 3circulated: FE B 1 2 19 6 On Writ of Certiorari United States, Petitioner, to the United States Z V. Court of Appeals for Lelord Kordel and Alfred Feldten. the Sixth Circuit. 5 [February, 1970] MR. JUSTICE STEWART delivered the opinion of the Court. The respondents are the president and vice president, respectively, of Detroit Vital Foods, Inc. They were convicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, along with the corporation, for violations of the Federal Food Drug,, and Cosmetic Act. The Court of Appeals for, the Circuit re the respondents' convictions on the ground that the Government's use of interrogatories to obtain evidence from the respondents in a nearly contemporaneous -civil eernelettinatiori' proceeding 131peratmci rtia -vierlate their Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination. 2 We granted certiorari to consider the cn questions raised by the Government's invocation of simultaneous civil and criminal proceedings in the enforcement of federal law.' In March 1960 the Division of Regulatory Management of the Food and Drug Administration (hereafter 0 1 21 U. S. C. 301 P'21 et seq. 2 United States v. Detroit Vital Foods, Inc., 407 F. 2d 570. The Court of Appeals initially reversed the judgments of conviction of all three defendants, but on the Government's petition for rehearing it affirmed with respect to the corporation. 3 395 U. S. 932. 8 1-4?-1

;$..1z4n-rzni (Court of t1 Itniirb a5frington, p. February 17, 1970 MEMORANDUM TO THE CONFERENCE No. 87 - United States v. Kordel Pending the disposition of this case, we have held the petition of Detroit Vital Foods for rehearing of our denial of its petition for a writ of certiorari. 395 U.S. 935 (No. 1285, O. T. 1968). As noted in the opinion "I have circulated, the Court of Appeals initially overturned the corporation's conviction along with those of the respondents, but reversed itself on the Government's petition for rehearing and affirmed with respect to the company. That affirmance, as the corporation now concedes in its application for rehearing, amounts to a sub silentio rejection of all other contentions advanced by the corporation before the Court of Appeals: Thus, although we remand in.1\10,. B.7.conside ration.of the remaining urged by the individual defendants not yet reached by the Court of Appeals, there is no reason to suppose that that court has not already given full consideration to the errors claimed by the corporation. Accordingly, I recommend that the corporation's application for rehearing be denied without comment on the Order List following announcement of the opinion in No. 87.

""l*'--+11.-r7p REPRODUCED FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPT HIVISION, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Au:mutt pita of tile Xinittit Mates 'askkingtalt, J. arg4g CHAMBERS OF JUSTICE THURGOOD MARSHALL February 9, 1970 Ret, No. 87 - U. S. v. Lelord Kordel and Alfred Feldten Dear Potter: Please join me. Sincerely,.0 IP tg in O cn O T. m. Zlidtice -stewart cc: The Conference