RNR Enterprises, Inc. v. Securities and Exchange Commission
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
122 F.3d 93 (1997)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) (plaintiff) had information suggesting a violation of securities laws in connection with securities involving specialized mobile radio. It issued a Formal Order opening an investigation into the telecommunications industry. This Formal Order authorized the SEC to issue subpoenas for purposes of its investigation. Pursuant to the Formal Order, the SEC issued an administrative subpoena compelling the testimony of Richard Wells (defendant), chairman and CEO of RNR Enterprises, Inc. (RNR) (defendant), a telecommunications company that acquired and developed specialized mobile radio properties. The Formal Order did not specifically name RNR or Wells. Wells did not comply with the subpoena. The SEC filed a motion in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking enforcement of the subpoena. The SEC also filed a declaration describing the basis for the subpoena and the administrative processes followed to that point. The declaration stated that the information sought was relevant to the SEC’s ongoing investigation and not already within the SEC’s possession. The district court granted the motion. RNR and Wells appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jacobs, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.