Jack Flynn Carlin v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “Rule 81(a)(3) [specifically recognizes] that a district court, by local rule or by order, may limit the application of the [Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] in a summons proceeding.”
• holding that the movant’s interest in protecting release of her identifying information and her interest in due process did not warrant intervention
• noting that taxpayer could claim that the IRS sought material for an improper purpose only if that purpose were the sole object of the investigation
• noting that taxpayer could claim that the IRS sought material for an improper purpose only if that purpose were the sole object of the investigation
• noting that no “precise and authoritative definition of the interest that satisfies Rule 24(a)(2)” exists
• noting that no “precise and authoritative definition of the interest that satisfies Rule 24(a)(2)” exists

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).