Legal Document

506 U.S. 9 113 S.Ct. 447 121 L.Ed.2d 313 CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY CALIFORNIA, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES and Frank S. Zolin. No. 91-946. Argued Oct. 6, 1992. Decided Nov. 16, Syllabus* Pursuant to its jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. §§ 7402(b) 7604(a), the District Court ordered a state-court Clerk comply with summons issued by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for production of,inter alia, two tapes in Clerk's custody recording conversations between officials of petitioner Church Scientology (Church) their attorneys. Although filed timely notice appeal, request stay enforcement order was unsuccessful, copies were delivered IRS while appeal pending. The Appeals dismissed as moot, ruling that no controversy existed because had already been turned over IRS. Held: Compliance did not moot Church's appeal. Delivery mandate dismissal making it impossible grant "any effectual relief." See Mills v. Green, 159 651, 653, 16 132, 133, 40 L.Ed. 293. is now too late prevent, or provide fully satisfactory remedy for, invasion privacy occurred when obtained information on tapes, does have power effectuate partial ordering Government return destroy any may possess. Even if right 7604(a) district court limited those matters directly related whether should be enforced, question presented here there appellate review allegedly unlawful order. There nothing Code suggest Congress sought preclude such review, and, indeed, this has expressly held orders are subject review. Reisman Caplin, 375 440, 449, 84 508, 513-514, 11 459. several Courts accepted Government's argument proceedings, force line authority matched similar array decisions reaching contrary conclusion proceedings enforcing Federal Trade Commission discovery requests. significant difference governing statutes can explain divergent interpretations, nor reason conclude records relevant tax investigation mootness consequences other business have. Pp. ____. Vacated remanded. STEVENS, J., opinion unanimous Court. Eric M. Lieberman, New York City, petitioner. Lawrence G. Wallace, Washington, D.C., respondents. Justice STEVENS 1 Two attorneys July 1980 principal bone contention this, earlier, legal proceedings. 2 In an action Los Angeles County Superior Court,1 contended defendant unlawfully acquired possession tapes. Pending resolution action, state take certain documents. 3 1984, connection returns L. Ron Hubbard, founder Scientology, access documents possession.2 After served summons, he permitted agents examine make Thereafter, federal initiated Central California, entered temporary restraining directing file all notes, court.3 Those subsequently returned court. 4 On January 18, 1985, commenced proceeding filing petition enforce previously Clerk.4 intervened opposed ground they protected attorney-client privilege. protracted including Court, see United States Zolin, 491 554, 109 2619, 105 469 (1989), April 15, 1991, compliance summons. unsuccessfully While pending, show cause why moot. briefing issue, It explained: 5 "Because undisputed order, exists presently moot." CV 85-0440-HLH (CA9, Sept. 10, 1991). 6 We granted certiorari consider narrow properly 503 ----, 112 1261, 117 490 (1992). 7 * long settled "to give opinions upon questions abstract propositions, declare principles rules law which cannot affect matter issue case before it." 293 (1895). also Preiser Newkirk, 422 395, 401, 95 2330, 2334, 45 272 (1975); North Carolina Rice, 404 244, 246, 92 402, 404, 30 413 (1971). For reason, event occurs pending makes relief whatever" prevailing party, must dismissed. Mills, U.S., at S.Ct., 133. case, after took from 15 contends thereafter relief. disagree. 8 able parties status quo ante—there do withdraw knowledge examination tapes—a fashion some form meaningful circum stances these. Taxpayers obvious possessory interest records. When materials result violated Moreover, even retains only disputed materials, taxpayer still suffers injury continued namely, affront taxpayer's privacy. A person's maintaining his "papers effects" sufficient importance merit constitutional protection.5 Indeed, considers contained important demonstrated long, contentious history litigation. though possession. availability possible prevent being moot.6 argues, however, these basic inapplicable particular nature statute Reasoning premise courts empowered within jurisdiction, argues subject-matter determining "compel . of" requested 7402(b), 7604(a). n. 4, supra. Once answered occurred, more decide evaporates. 10 think misconceives inquiry case. enforced. scope Court's provisions deadlocked (1989).7 current incarnation question, elaborate statutory largely irrelevant. orders. To contrary, we 459 (1964). Thus, turns Congress' jurisdictional courts, but traditional justiciability, intervening rendered And, explained, improperly enforced could IRS' either destroyed. II recognize proceedings,8 requests.9 interpretations.10 Nor construing Code, considered appropriate rely earlier cases involving statutes, Act. Powell, 379 48, 57, 85 248, 254-255, 13 (1964) (citing Morton Salt Co., 338 632, 642-643, 70 357, 363-364, 94 401 (1950)). 12 therefore so concluding express merits establish adequate evidentiary basis support determination fell crime-fraud exception about res judicata advanced brief opposition certiorari. Brief Opposition 13-14. simply hold appeal.11 judgment vacated, remanded further consistent opinion. 14 ordered. syllabus constitutes part prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Lumber 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 50 499. California Armstrong, C420 153. Commissioner Revenue, delegate Secretary Treasury, broad accuracy returns. generally, Donaldson States, 400 517, 523-525, 91 534, 538-540, 27 580 Section 7602(a) authorizes summon person examination: "For purpose ascertaining correctness return, where none made, liability internal revenue equity transferee fiduciary respect tax, collecting liability, authorized — "(1) books, papers, records, data material inquiry;" § 7602(a). 84-9003-HLH (CD Cal. 27, 1984). Sections confer provides: "If summoned laws appear, testify, produce data, resides found shall process compel attendance, testimony, data." virtually identical except word "records" appears Fourth Amendment "The people secure persons, houses, effects, against unreasonable searches seizures, violated, Warrants probable cause, supported Oath affirmation, particularly describing place searched, persons things seized." Const., Amdt. 4. Petitioner refrain future use derived Such would obviously go towards returning ante than merely requiring thereof. However, guarantee will fact gleaned argued impermissible advisory Cf. G.M. Leasing Corp. 429 338, 359, 97 619, 530 (1977) (suppression fruits illegal search "premature" "if arise seeks them"). But FTC Gibson Products San Antonio, Inc., 569 F.2d 900, 903 (CA5 1978) (court relief, despite subpoena, subpoenaed forbidding using adjudicatory hearing). Because concerned ordered, leave "future use" another day. now, need placed restrictions ability disclose government agency. Ninth Circuit affirmed, 809 1411, 1416-1417 (CA9 1987), conditioning exceeded 556, 2622-2623. evenly divided affirmed Circuit. Id., 561, 2625. divides lower courts. Compare 1416-1417, Author Services, 804 1520, 1525-1526 1986) (district "considerable" discretion set terms order), amended, 811 1264 (1987), Barrett, 837 1341 1988) (en banc) lacks "conditionally enforce" summons; single enforced), cert. denied, 492 926, 3264, 106 609 (1989). Kersting, 891 1407, 1410, 1989), 498 812, 111 49, 25 (1990); Hintze IRS, 879 121, 124-125 (CA4 1989); World Peace, 878 1281 (CA10 Sherlock, 756 1145, 1146-1147 1985); First Family Mortgage Corp., 739 1275, 1278-1279 (CA7 1984); Kis, 658 526, 533 1981), 455 1018, 102 1712, 72 135 (1982); Equity Farmers Elevator, 652 752 (CA8 1981); Silva & Accountancy 641 710, 711 Deak-Perera Int'l Banking 610 89 (CA2 1979); Kurshan Riley, 484 952 1973); Lyons, 442 1144, 1145 (CA1 1971). Gluck 771 750 (CA3 1985). F.2d, (compliance subpoena appeal; hearing); Ernstthal, 197 U.S.App.D.C. 174, 175, 607 488, 489 (1979) documents); Atlantic Richfield Co. FTC, 546 646, 650 1977) (same); Browning, 140 292, 293-294, 1, 435 96, 97-98, (1970) (same). Invention Submission 296 124, 965 1086, 1089, (1992) civil investigative demand pursuant 57b-1(e) responsive them"); Casey 578 793 (action seeking enjoin presents live parties' wrongfully records). Territory Guam Sea-Land Service, 294 295, 958 1150, 1153 Maritime party discovered materials). distinguishable involve adjudicative, investigative, subpoenas. involved adjudicative Submission, Casey, fact, "closely paralle[l]" corresponding Handler, Recent Antitrust Developments—1964, 63 Mich.L.Rev. 59, 90 Act provides, pertinent part: "Any may, contumacy refusal obey person, partnership, corporation documentary evidence ." 38 Stat. 722, 49. words Professor Handler: "Section 7602 Treasury taxpayers witnesses testify grants same Commission. Should recipient refuse comply, both afford procedures. neither administrative self-executing: obedience addition, pari materia, criminal offense "neglect" appear documents." Mich.L.Rev., (footnotes omitted). conclusion, reject petitioner's "fall back" moots disinterested third-party—here, Court—does not. 25-34; Reply 16-18. agree "difference method create distinction requirement." 30. This justiciable third complied stake outcome prevail merits. directed parties, derives concerns regarding finality, mootness. As general rule, court's "final order" present objection immediately appeals compliance, contempt, then contempt Ryan, 402 530, 1580, 29 so-called Perlman doctrine, 247 7, 417, 62 950 (1918), treated appealable final presumably risk refusing compliance. Ibid. 15B C. Wright, A. Miller, E. Cooper, Practice Procedure 3914.23, pp. 156-167 (2d ed. 1992). bearing "third-party exception" rule barring immediate

Classification Label: 8