STATEMENT REGARDING PREFERENCE These proceedings do not qualify under any of the preference categories set forth in Appendix I to the Eleventh Circuit Rules. Appellee submits, however, that the extraordinary nature of an impeachment inquiry, and considerations of comity between branches of government require that this proceeding be expedited. STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT Counsel have been advised that the Court has set the matter for oral argument on October 28, 1987 and thus no statement in this regard would seem necessary or appropriate. CASES TABLE OF AUTHORITIES * Claiborne v. United States Senate D.D.C., C.A. No. 86-2780 * Doe v. Rosenberry 255 F.2d 118 (2d Cir. 1958) * Douglas Oil v. Petrol Stops Northwest 441 U.S. 211 (1979) * Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund Gravel v. United States, 408 U.S. 606 (1972) In re Grand Jury Ven-Fuel, 441 F. Supp. 1209 Page 10,11 12,13 19,20,21,23,24 9,10,26 9, 25 .26 In re Grand Jury Investigation of Uranium Industry, (D.D.C. Misc. 78-0173, Aug. 16, 1979) . . . . .15 * In re Petition to Inspect and Copy Grand Jury Materials 735 F.2d 1261 (11th Cir.), cert. denied 469 U.S. 884 (1984), aff'g 576 F. Supp. 1275 (S.D. Fla. 1983) . . passim * In re Report and Recommendation of June 5, 1987 9,11,15,17 Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S.(13 Otto) 168 (1881) McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, 421 (1819) .. 8 United States v. Baggot, 463 U.S. 476 (1983) United States v. Fishbach and Moore, Inc. 776 F.2d 839, 842 (9th Cir. 1985) 18 19 United States v. Michael O. Myers, Raymond Lederer, Frank Thompson, et. al., Cr. Nos. 80-00249, 80-00253, 80-00291 (E.D.N.Y., June 27, 1980) . 16 United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974) United States v. Harrison A. Williams, Jr., et. al. 16 Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, 28 U.S.c. sec. 372(c) . 28 U.S.C. $1291 . Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. section 3500. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) (3) (C) (i) (a) the delivery of two public lectures on the evenings of October 20 and 21 as part of a series of public lectures scheduled by the School of Law to commemorate the bicentennial of the Constitution, and (b) a special committee meeting and a special faculty meeting on October 20 and 21 respectively, as well as his regular teaching responsibilities. Those commitments have precluded him from determining what additional arguments, beyond those presented in the papers already before the court, should be developed and from preparing a supplemental brief to present them properly for the courts deliberation. Accordingly, Judge Hastings asks that this court defer consideration of the issues concerning disclosure to Judge Hastings and to the public and grant his counsel until Monday, October 26, 1987, to submit such supplemental briefing as he determines necessary. In the alternative, he asks that the court consider the arguments developed in the Emergency Motion and in the memoranda included in the Appendix filed with that motion and determine at or after the hearing on October 28, 1987, whether and what additional briefing is necessary and appropriate. Robert S. Catz c/o Cleveland-Marshall Cleveland State University Respectfully Submitted Сние Пелбет Terence J. Anderson P.O. Box 248087 Coral Gables, FL 33124 John W. Karr, Esq. Patricia Williams, Esq. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On October 22, 1987, copies of the foregoing Motion for Division of Issues and for Two-Day Extension for Filing Briefs on the Merits were dispatched to the following counsel by Federal Express-Overnight Delivery service: Alan I. Baron United States House of Committee on the Judiciary House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Jo Ann Farrington U.S. Dept. of Justice 1400 New York Avenue, N.W. as well as to the members of the designated panel as di |